NARAYANI vs SMT. NANJAMMANI — 25/2012

Case under Others Section UNDERSECTION26ANDUNDERORDER7RULE1OFC.P.C.. Status: JUDGEMENTS. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAMS710001272012

JUDGEMENTS

Next Hearing

27th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

25/2012

Filing Date

19-01-2012

Registration No

25/2012

Registration Date

19-01-2012

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TIRUMAKUDAL NARSIPURA

Judge

451-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC TIRUMAKUDAL NARSIPUR

Acts & Sections

OTHERS Section UNDERSECTION26ANDUNDERORDER7RULE1OFC.P.C.

Petitioner(s)

NARAYANI

Adv. SRI. B.M. NAGABHUSHANAMURTHY

SIDDAMADHU

R.SRINIVAS

Respondent(s)

SMT. NANJAMMANI

Hearing History

Judge: 451-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC TIRUMAKUDAL NARSIPUR

12-03-2026

JUDGEMENTS

07-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

25-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

23-02-2026

CROSS OF PW

05-02-2026

CROSS OF PW

Interim Orders

24-02-2016
Deposition
01-07-2019
Deposition
13-09-2019
Deposition
12-08-2021
Deposition
02-06-2022
Deposition
13-07-2022
Deposition
09-09-2022
Deposition
23-09-2022
Deposition
22-05-2023
Orders
17-06-2023
Orders
04-09-2025
Orders
19-01-2026
Deposition
25-02-2026
Deposition

Summary This is a civil property dispute case (OS 25/2012) in Kannada. The court examined witness testimony regarding land ownership and survey documents (S.No. 62/1 containing 4 acres 18 gunthas). The court found that the plaintiff filed a false case with fabricated evidence and dishonest witness statements to illegally seize the defendant's property. The court rejected the plaintiff's claims, finding no credible documentary support for the ownership claims and concluding the case was motivated by malicious intent to dispossess the defendant of his land. The case is adjourned for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a civil property dispute case (OS 25/2012) in Kannada. The court examined witness testimony regarding land ownership and survey documents (S.No. 62/1 containing 4 acres 18 gunthas). The court found that the plaintiff filed a false case with fabricated evidence and dishonest witness statements to illegally seize the defendant's property. The court rejected the plaintiff's claims, finding no credible documentary support for the ownership claims and concluding the case was motivated by malicious intent to dispossess the defendant of his land. The case is adjourned for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TIRUMAKUDAL NARSIPURA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case