Shankar Huliyappa Gouda vs Fransis Fascal Fernandez — 15/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section u/Or.VII, Rule1,2, Sec.26,151. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK210002382024
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
15/2024
Filing Date
05-02-2024
Registration No
15/2024
Registration Date
06-02-2024
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANKOLA
Judge
1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shankar Huliyappa Gouda
Adv. S.O.NAIK
Jayu Huliyappa Gouda,
Vithoba Huliyappa Gouda
Savitri Huliyappa Gouda
Respondent(s)
Fransis Fascal Fernandez
Raju Rama Naik
Gopalkrishna Channappa Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | HEARING |
| 13-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 22-01-2026 | HEARING |
| 17-12-2025 | HEARING |
| 26-11-2025 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: OS 15/2024 Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' application (I.A.NO.II) seeking permission to cross-examine the defendants' affidavit deponents at the interlocutory stage of a temporary injunction hearing. Key Reasoning: The court held that Order XIX Rule 2 of the CPC, which permits cross-examination of deponents, does not apply to interlocutory applications like temporary injunction proceedings. At the interlocutory stage, courts need only examine the prima facie case based on pleadings and documents—not conduct a full trial. Permitting cross-examination would constitute a "mini trial" on the merits, which is impermissible at this preliminary stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OS 15/2024 Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' application (I.A.NO.II) seeking permission to cross-examine the defendants' affidavit deponents at the interlocutory stage of a temporary injunction hearing. Key Reasoning: The court held that Order XIX Rule 2 of the CPC, which permits cross-examination of deponents, does not apply to interlocutory applications like temporary injunction proceedings. At the interlocutory stage, courts need only examine the prima facie case based on pleadings and documents—not conduct a full trial. Permitting cross-examination would constitute a "mini trial" on the merits, which is impermissible at this preliminary stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts