Ramadas Tukaram Shanbhag vs Mahabaleshwar Govind Gouda — 49/2018
Case under U/o Vii Ruel 1 R/w Sec. 26 of Cpc Section 1. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK210005172018
Next Hearing
19th June 2026
Filing Number
49/2018
Filing Date
20-03-2018
Registration No
49/2018
Registration Date
20-03-2018
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANKOLA
Judge
1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ramadas Tukaram Shanbhag
Adv. Nishant M.Nayak
Anant Tukaram Shanbhag
Vittal Tukaram Shanbhag
Respondent(s)
Mahabaleshwar Govind Gouda
Seeta Rama Gangolli
T. Komal Madev Shaji
Venktraman Hanumant Naik
Kalyani Kom Govind Harikantra
Govind Lokappa Harikantra
Vasant Murkundi Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 27-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 20-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 23-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
The case concerns a witness examination (Satish Goud, age 45, a shopkeeper from Kumata) in a civil proceeding dated 18-02-2022 before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court in Ankola. The witness testified regarding survey documents (NIP-63 and NIP-64) related to property matters, but discrepancies emerged regarding the signatures of the revenue official on these documents. The court directed further examination of the survey records. No further cross-examination was ordered, and the witness statement was recorded in the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The case concerns a witness examination (Satish Goud, age 45, a shopkeeper from Kumata) in a civil proceeding dated 18-02-2022 before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court in Ankola. The witness testified regarding survey documents (NIP-63 and NIP-64) related to property matters, but discrepancies emerged regarding the signatures of the revenue official on these documents. The court directed further examination of the survey records. No further cross-examination was ordered, and the witness statement was recorded in the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts