Lakshmamma vs Tahasildar Advocate - Adv for D 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 13 K.S. Prakash KAR 883/ — 17/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section us. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 01st July 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KARN410000402017
Next Hearing
01st July 2026
Filing Number
17/2017
Filing Date
12-01-2017
Registration No
17/2017
Registration Date
12-01-2017
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI
Judge
1029-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Lakshmamma
Adv. K R ANANTHA MURTHY
Gangahanumaiah
Lakshmamma
Bhagyamma
Respondent(s)
Tahasildar Advocate - Adv for D 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 13 K.S. Prakash KAR 883/
Asst. Commissioner
Deputy Commissioner
Chief Secretary
Gundurao
Hearing History
Judge: 1029-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 03-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 12-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 17-10-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary of Case 17/2017 This land dispute case involves petitioners Lakshmamma and Gangahanumaiah challenging property ownership claims. The court examined a 5 acre 12 guntas property (S.No. 165) with 22 guntas waste land, tracing ownership from a 1954 partition deed and a 1964 ancestor's claim of 3 acre 12 guntas. The court found the remaining 2 acres lacked clear ownership documentation and noted discrepancies in the title deed regarding the petitioners' alleged share. The Tahasildar's order (N.P. 37-38) was found defective, and the court determined the government land classification was unsupported by evidence. The petition was allowed and the case remitted for proper determination of individual property rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 17/2017 This land dispute case involves petitioners Lakshmamma and Gangahanumaiah challenging property ownership claims. The court examined a 5 acre 12 guntas property (S.No. 165) with 22 guntas waste land, tracing ownership from a 1954 partition deed and a 1964 ancestor's claim of 3 acre 12 guntas. The court found the remaining 2 acres lacked clear ownership documentation and noted discrepancies in the title deed regarding the petitioners' alleged share. The Tahasildar's order (N.P. 37-38) was found defective, and the court determined the government land classification was unsupported by evidence. The petition was allowed and the case remitted for proper determination of individual property rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts