CHANDRAMMA vs MAHADEVEGOWDA ALAIS CONDUCTOR Advocate - UMESH. S. — 162/2021
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section O7R1. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLEDC IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS500016192021
Filing Number
168/2021
Filing Date
08-11-2021
Registration No
162/2021
Registration Date
08-11-2021
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD
Judge
448-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--SETTLEDC IN LOK ADALATH
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
CHANDRAMMA
Adv. S. PRUTHVI RAJ
Shanthala
Arjun Gowda
Pratap Gowda. T.M
Respondent(s)
MAHADEVEGOWDA ALAIS CONDUCTOR Advocate - UMESH. S.
Sarojamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Shivaraja
Adv. UMESH. S.
Chandrashekhara
Adv. UMESH. S.
Shivakumara
Adv. UMESH. S.
Shivamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Mahadevamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Nagamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Mallajamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Neelamma
Adv. UMESH. S.
Rathnamma
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Parvathi
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Madhu. B
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Soumya. S.S
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Kamakshi
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Pavitra. T.P
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
S. Nagesh
Adv. MANJUNATHA. H.M.
Sunil Kumar. T.M
Adv. UMESH. S.
Hearing History
Judge: 448-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
Disposed
SETTLEMENT
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-02-2026 | SETTLEMENT |
| 19-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
| 29-10-2025 | EVIDENCE |
| 16-09-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court approved a compromise settlement between the plaintiffs seeking partition and 1/5th share in schedule properties and defendants Nos. 1-10 & 18. After verifying that both parties freely agreed without coercion or fraud, the court allowed the compromise petition under CPC Order XXIII Rule 3, fully resolving the dispute. The court directed the office to draw a final decree accordingly and refund the full court fee to the plaintiffs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court approved a compromise settlement between the plaintiffs seeking partition and 1/5th share in schedule properties and defendants Nos. 1-10 & 18. After verifying that both parties freely agreed without coercion or fraud, the court allowed the compromise petition under CPC Order XXIII Rule 3, fully resolving the dispute. The court directed the office to draw a final decree accordingly and refund the full court fee to the plaintiffs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts