B B SYAM vs PUTTAGOWRAMMA — 65/2021
Case under U/o 7 Rule I of C.p.c Section UO7R1OFCPC. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS610005302021
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
64/2021
Filing Date
18-02-2021
Registration No
65/2021
Registration Date
18-02-2021
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PERIYAPATNA
Judge
452-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC PIRIYAPATNA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
B B SYAM
Adv. N KARUNAKARA
Respondent(s)
PUTTAGOWRAMMA
GANESHA
SURESHA
MANJU
RAMA
Hearing History
Judge: 452-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC PIRIYAPATNA
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 16-03-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 07-02-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 21-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
This is a civil court order from India (OS 65/2021) in Kannada language. After examination of witness testimony and evidence regarding a property dispute: Summary: The court found that the 4th defendant and their sibling gave false testimony and fabricated claims to illegally seize property rights from the 1st plaintiff. The court determined that the 1st defendant (Puttugauramma) has legitimate rights and possession over the disputed land (measuring approximately 1 acre 12 guntas in Survey No. 76/2-A-2), and established clear property boundaries with details of adjoining lands. The case details witness examination findings and rejected the defendants' false claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a civil court order from India (OS 65/2021) in Kannada language. After examination of witness testimony and evidence regarding a property dispute: Summary: The court found that the 4th defendant and their sibling gave false testimony and fabricated claims to illegally seize property rights from the 1st plaintiff. The court determined that the 1st defendant (Puttugauramma) has legitimate rights and possession over the disputed land (measuring approximately 1 acre 12 guntas in Survey No. 76/2-A-2), and established clear property boundaries with details of adjoining lands. The case details witness examination findings and rejected the defendants' false claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts