Shivanna vs Kumudini — 45/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Us. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 24th March 2026.
R.A. - Regular Appeals
CNR: KARN410004582021
Filing Number
45/2021
Filing Date
03-Aug-2021
Registration No
45/2021
Registration Date
03-Aug-2021
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI
Judge
1029-Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 02-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Shivanna
Adv. G. Chandrashekharaiah
Respondent(s)
-
1.Kumudini
-
2.Rama Bai
-
3.Suhasini
-
4.B. Jagannath
-
5.Saraswathi
-
6.Kumari Hemalatha
-
7.M. Dasaratha Rao
-
8.M. Sashi Kumar
-
9.M. Kiran Kumar
-
10.G. Sandeep Kumar
-
11.Govinda Kumar
-
12.N. Radha Bai
-
13.N. Roopa Rao
-
14.Asha
-
15.T.R Mudanmohan Rao
-
16.T.M Kumar
-
17.Narasimha Murthy
-
18.Tarabai
-
19.Dhamendra Pawar
-
20.V. Jayaram
-
21.Thammayya
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
JudgmentView PDF
Summary: Shivanna v. Kumudini and Rama Bai and Suhasini Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed Shivanna's appeal and upheld the trial court's decree granting permanent injunction to plaintiffs protecting their peaceful possession of three land sites. Key Reasoning: The court found that defendants failed to adequately prove cancellation of the General Power of Attorney (GPA) allegedly issued to Guddaiah. Under the Indian Evidence Act Section 85 and Supreme Court precedent (Thankamma George v. Lilly Thomas), valid GPA termination requires documented communication to both the agent and third parties—evidence defendants never presented. The sale deeds showed multiple GPA holders inconsistent with defendants' single-agent claim, and defendants never testified to rebut plaintiffs' documented purchase and possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Mar-2026
Disposed
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
23-Mar-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Mar-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Mar-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
06-Mar-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
27-Feb-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Feb-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
07-Feb-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
06-Feb-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Feb-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
27-Jan-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
20-Jan-2026
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
09-Jan-2026
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Dec-2025
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
09-Dec-2025
Judgments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
06-Dec-2025
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Dec-2025
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Nov-2025
For Amendement
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
14-Oct-2025
For Amendement
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
16-Sep-2025
For Amendement
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
28-Aug-2025
For Amendement
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Aug-2025
For Amendement
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Jul-2025
Orders.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
28-Jun-2025
Orders.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Jun-2025
Orders.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Jun-2025
Orders.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
15-Apr-2025
Orders.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
08-Apr-2025
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
11-Mar-2025
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Feb-2025
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Feb-2025
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Jan-2025
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
26-Nov-2024
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
30-Oct-2024
Arguments
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
23-Aug-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Jul-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
15-Jun-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
28-May-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
22-Feb-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Jan-2024
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
26-Oct-2023
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
23-Aug-2023
Await Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Jul-2023
Call For Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Jun-2023
Call For Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Mar-2023
Call For Lcr
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Feb-2023
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Dec-2022
Await Notice/Summons
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Oct-2022
Notice
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Sep-2022
Hearing
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Aug-2022
Hearing
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
21-Jul-2022
For Objection
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
21-Jun-2022
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Apr-2022
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
15-Mar-2022
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
08-Feb-2022
Notice Through R.P.A.D.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
21-Dec-2021
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
09-Nov-2021
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
08-Oct-2021
For Steps
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
31-Aug-2021
Notice Through R.P.A.D.
Prl. Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Aug-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Aug-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 45/2021
Summary: Shivanna v. Kumudini and Rama Bai and Suhasini Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed Shivanna's appeal and upheld the trial court's decree granting permanent injunction to plaintiffs protecting their peaceful possession of three land sites. Key Reasoning: The court found that defendants failed to adequately prove cancellation of the General Power of Attorney (GPA) allegedly issued to Guddaiah. Under the Indian Evidence Act Section 85 and Supreme Court precedent (Thankamma George v. Lilly Thomas), valid GPA termination requires documented communication to both the agent and third parties—evidence defendants never presented. The sale deeds showed multiple GPA holders inconsistent with defendants' single-agent claim, and defendants never testified to rebut plaintiffs' documented purchase and possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts