Vajrappa vs Muniyamma — 249/2021

Case under U/o Section 7rule1r/w. Status: ARGUMENT. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KARN020006342021

ARGUMENT

Next Hearing

06th June 2026

Filing Number

247/2021

Filing Date

05-08-2021

Registration No

249/2021

Registration Date

05-08-2021

Court

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA

Judge

105-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM

Acts & Sections

U/o Section 7rule1r/w

Petitioner(s)

Vajrappa

Adv. Padmanabha

Nagarathnamma

Narayanappa. M

Nagaraju

Narasimhaiah

Yerramma

Venkatesh

Ravikumar

Respondent(s)

Muniyamma

Narayana

Vajrappa

Vajramma

G. Siddalingappa

R.B.S. Ekoram

Hearing History

Judge: 105-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM

16-04-2026

ARGUMENT

28-03-2026

EVIDENCE

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE

23-02-2026

EVIDENCE

05-02-2026

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

04-12-2024
Orders
30-01-2025
Issue
10-06-2025
Deposition
05-01-2026
Deposition
05-02-2026
Deposition
13-03-2026
Deposition
16-04-2026
Deposition

Case 249/2021 Summary On 16-04-2026, the court examined the first defense witness (DW-1). The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving alleged fraudulent sale deed. The witness's cross-examination revealed inconsistencies regarding knowledge of the plaintiffs, defendants, property ownership history, and whether the sale deed was executed fraudulently. The witness denied knowledge of key facts about the parties' relationships and the property's legal status. The court recorded the witness's testimony and admitted it into evidence after the witness confirmed its accuracy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 249/2021 Summary On 16-04-2026, the court examined the first defense witness (DW-1). The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving alleged fraudulent sale deed. The witness's cross-examination revealed inconsistencies regarding knowledge of the plaintiffs, defendants, property ownership history, and whether the sale deed was executed fraudulently. The witness denied knowledge of key facts about the parties' relationships and the property's legal status. The court recorded the witness's testimony and admitted it into evidence after the witness confirmed its accuracy. 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

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case