Mallesh vs Kullamma — 7/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o,43,rule,1(R). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED/ GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 04th April 2026.

M.A. - Miscellanuous Appeals

CNR: KARN210003572024

Case disposed

Filing Number

7/2024

Filing Date

28-03-2024

Registration No

7/2024

Registration Date

28-03-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAPATNA

Judge

1564-ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

Decision Date

04th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED/ GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section U/o,43,rule,1(R)

Petitioner(s)

Mallesh

Adv. HARIS KHAN

Respondent(s)

Kullamma

Shivaramu

Hearing History

Judge: 1564-ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

04-04-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

JUDGMENTS

13-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

03-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

12-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

04-04-2026
Judgment

Summary of Case 7/2024 The appellate court allowed Mallesh's appeal and granted a temporary injunction restraining Kullamma and Shivaramu from constructing on the disputed property until trial conclusion. The court found that Mallesh established a prima facie case of ownership through grant documents and land records, while the defendants' claim of adverse possession remained unproven and must be established during trial. Since the defendants' alleged unauthorized possession would cause irreparable harm to the rightful owner, the balance of convenience favored Mallesh. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 7/2024 The appellate court allowed Mallesh's appeal and granted a temporary injunction restraining Kullamma and Shivaramu from constructing on the disputed property until trial conclusion. The court found that Mallesh established a prima facie case of ownership through grant documents and land records, while the defendants' claim of adverse possession remained unproven and must be established during trial. Since the defendants' alleged unauthorized possession would cause irreparable harm to the rightful owner, the balance of convenience favored Mallesh. 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

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAPATNA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case