JYOTHI C vs MARAMMA Advocate - NARAYANASWAMY — 462/2016
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 1. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS510025542016
Next Hearing
23rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
463/2016
Filing Date
10-08-2016
Registration No
462/2016
Registration Date
11-08-2016
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD
Judge
1098-II ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JYOTHI C
Adv. H.N.MALLESHAIAH
MAHESH
Respondent(s)
MARAMMA Advocate - NARAYANASWAMY
RAVI
Adv. NARAYANASWAMY
Hearing History
Judge: 1098-II ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 30-01-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 07-01-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 06-11-2025 | EVIDENCE | |
| 19-09-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
This is a property dispute case (O.S. No. 462/2016) from the 2nd Additional First Grade Judicial Magistrate's Court, Nanjangud, heard on 30-01-2026. The court examined witness testimony regarding ownership of scheduled properties, with the plaintiff claiming the defendants unlawfully possess assets that should belong to them. The case involves competing claims over immovable property and allegations of improper transfer of assets. The court adjourned the matter to allow the defendant's counsel additional time for cross-examination arguments, with proceedings continuing in open court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a property dispute case (O.S. No. 462/2016) from the 2nd Additional First Grade Judicial Magistrate's Court, Nanjangud, heard on 30-01-2026. The court examined witness testimony regarding ownership of scheduled properties, with the plaintiff claiming the defendants unlawfully possess assets that should belong to them. The case involves competing claims over immovable property and allegations of improper transfer of assets. The court adjourned the matter to allow the defendant's counsel additional time for cross-examination arguments, with proceedings continuing in open court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts