Ningamma vs Bhagyamma Advocate - C.R SHIVARAJ — 403/2021

Case under U/o Section 6rule1ofcpc. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 21st July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 21-Jul-2026 this date has passed

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KARN020010062021

Filing Number

401/2021

Filing Date

15-Nov-2021

Registration No

403/2021

Registration Date

15-Nov-2021

Court

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA

Judge

105-Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

U/o Section 6rule1ofcpc

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Ningamma

    Adv. SHASHIDARA.P

  2. 2.Srinivas

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Bhagyamma Advocate - C.R SHIVARAJ

  2. 2.Chandraiah

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  3. 3.Srinivas

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  4. 4.Venkataraja

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  5. 5.Ramakrishnaiah

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  6. 6.Thimmaraja

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  7. 7.Gowramma

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  8. 8.Sadappa

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  9. 9.Puttaswamaih

    Adv. C.R SHIVARAJ

  10. 10.Pavana

  11. 11.Kavana

  12. 12.The Special Land Acquisition Officer

    Adv. T.K.MADHU MURTHY

Case History

  1. 21-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 25-Apr-2026

    OrdersView PDF

    Case Summary: O.S. 403/2021 Outcome: Defendant No.13's application to reject the plaint for want of cause of action under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC was dismissed without costs on 25.04.2026. Key Points: The court held that the plaint clearly disclosed a valid cause of action for partition and separate possession of agricultural properties claimed as joint family property. The court rejected the defendant's arguments that the plaint was concocted and lacked merit, finding that on meaningful reading, the plaintiffs adequately averred facts establishing their right to sue. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  4. 04-Apr-2026

    Orders

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  5. 28-Mar-2026

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  9. 19-Jan-2026

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  10. 02-Dec-2025

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  11. 27-Oct-2025

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  12. 22-Sep-2025

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  13. 18-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  14. 08-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  15. 11-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  16. 07-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  17. 05-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  18. 10-Dec-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  19. 29-Oct-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  20. 03-Sep-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  21. 16-Jul-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  22. 19-Jun-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  23. 23-Apr-2024

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  24. 21-Mar-2024

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  25. 06-Mar-2024

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  26. 19-Feb-2024

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  27. 02-Feb-2024

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  28. 10-Jan-2024

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  29. 18-Dec-2023

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  30. 11-Dec-2023

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  31. 29-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  32. 15-Nov-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  33. 15-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  34. 09-Oct-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  35. 09-Oct-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  36. 22-Sep-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  37. 22-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  38. 30-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  39. 12-Jul-2023

    IssueView PDF

  40. 12-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  41. 07-Jun-2023

    OrdersView PDF

  42. 07-Jun-2023

    Issues

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  43. 30-May-2023

    Orders

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  44. 29-May-2023

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  45. 26-May-2023

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  46. 17-Apr-2023

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  47. 20-Mar-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  48. 20-Mar-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  49. 07-Feb-2023

    Evidence

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  50. 09-Jan-2023

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  51. 22-Nov-2022

    Summons

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  52. 07-Nov-2022

    Orders

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  53. 13-Oct-2022

    Orders

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  54. 21-Sep-2022

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  55. 25-Aug-2022

    To Hear

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  56. 27-Jul-2022

    Hearing

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  57. 19-Jul-2022

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  58. 13-Jul-2022

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  59. 13-Apr-2022

    IAs

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  60. 18-Jan-2022

    Second List

    Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM

  61. 16-Nov-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  62. 15-Nov-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. 403/2021

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. 403/2021 Outcome: Defendant No.13's application to reject the plaint for want of cause of action under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC was dismissed without costs on 25.04.2026. Key Points: The court held that the plaint clearly disclosed a valid cause of action for partition and separate possession of agricultural properties claimed as joint family property. The court rejected the defendant's arguments that the plaint was concocted and lacked merit, finding that on meaningful reading, the plaintiffs adequately averred facts establishing their right to sue. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case