Munirathnamma vs Ramaiah — 31/2015
Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Status: ORDERS.. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KARN410000732015
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
31/2015
Filing Date
20-01-2015
Registration No
31/2015
Registration Date
20-01-2015
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI
Judge
1029-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Munirathnamma
Adv. V. VISWANATH
Respondent(s)
Ramaiah
Muniyappa
Lakshmana
Kencharamaiah
Lakshmamma
Mala K
Leela @ Neela K
Chandrashekar
K T Shivanand
D2(A).Lakshmamma
D2(B).Devaraj
D2(C)MANJUNATH
D2(D).Bhagya
Hearing History
Judge: 1029-PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
ORDERS.
ORDERS.
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-06-2026 | ORDERS. |
| 21-04-2026 | ORDERS. |
| 18-04-2026 | HEARING |
| 13-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 19-02-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 31/2015 Case No.: 31/2015 Petitioner: Munirathnamma Respondents: Ramaiah, Muniyappa, and Lakshmana Order Date: 18.07.2025 Outcome: The court's judgment on a property dispute involving three properties (survey numbers 1/16, 3/21/1, and 22/2) was delivered. The court decreed that petitioner Munirathnamma's son and his wife are entitled to Rs. 33 lakhs and Rs. 14 lakhs respectively as their share. The respondents' counter-claim for Rs. 8 lakhs (1/6 share) was partially allowed. The petition was substantially allowed regarding property distribution, with the court rejecting claims in Exhibits 2, 3, and 4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 31/2015 Case No.: 31/2015 Petitioner: Munirathnamma Respondents: Ramaiah, Muniyappa, and Lakshmana Order Date: 18.07.2025 Outcome: The court's judgment on a property dispute involving three properties (survey numbers 1/16, 3/21/1, and 22/2) was delivered. The court decreed that petitioner Munirathnamma's son and his wife are entitled to Rs. 33 lakhs and Rs. 14 lakhs respectively as their share. The respondents' counter-claim for Rs. 8 lakhs (1/6 share) was partially allowed. The petition was substantially allowed regarding property distribution, with the court rejecting claims in Exhibits 2, 3, and 4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts