Madevi w/o Venkatappa Naik. vs Durgamma w/o Kuppayya Naik. — 28/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7 Rule 1,2. Status: Await Orders. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.

Await Orders Next hearing 23-Apr-2026 this date has passed

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAUK310008782023

Filing Number

28/2023

Filing Date

23-Mar-2023

Registration No

28/2023

Registration Date

24-Mar-2023

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHATKALA

Judge

867-Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

Last updated 19-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7 Rule 1,2

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Madevi w/o Venkatappa Naik.

    Adv. Manjunath Gond

  2. 2.Vasudeva S/o Venktappa Naik,

  3. 3.Rukmini W/o Manohar Naik.

  4. 4.Dayananda s/o Venktappa Naik.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Durgamma w/o Kuppayya Naik.

  2. 2.Suresh Jattayya Naik.Age 45 years.

  3. 3.Laxman Jattayya Naik.

  4. 4.Manjunath Jattayya Naik,age 41 years.

  5. 5.Maruti Jattayya Naik.age 39 years.

  6. 6.Padmavathi Kom Lachmayya Naik.age 45 years.

  7. 7.Laxmi w/o Sankus Naik.age 48 years.

  8. 8.Nagamma W/o Mohan Naik,age 46 years.

  9. 9.Gangamma w/o Mastappa Naik,age 44 years.

  10. 10.Savitri w/o Gajanana Naik.age 42 years.

  11. 11.Manjunath s/o Lachmayya Naik,age 38 years.

Case History

  1. 23-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Await Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  3. 28-Jan-2026

    Await Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  4. 18-Dec-2025

    Await Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  5. 13-Nov-2025

    Await Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  6. 25-Sep-2025

    Await Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  7. 21-Aug-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  8. 10-Jul-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  9. 11-Jun-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  10. 09-Apr-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  11. 06-Mar-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  12. 30-Jan-2025

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  13. 18-Dec-2024

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  14. 06-Nov-2024

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  15. 19-Sep-2024

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  16. 09-Aug-2024

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  17. 20-Jun-2024

    Await Records

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  18. 26-Apr-2024

    Evidence

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  19. 19-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  20. 10-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  21. 08-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  22. 24-Nov-2023

    List Of Witness And Documents

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  23. 23-Nov-2023

    Issues

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  24. 20-Nov-2023

    Issues

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  25. 03-Nov-2023

    OrdersView PDF

    Summary: The court dismissed interim applications (I.A. No.III and V) filed by plaintiffs seeking injunction to restrain defendants from constructing a shop on jointly-owned property. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience in their favor, or irreparable loss, noting the defendants claimed oral partition of the property and questioned whether plaintiffs had adequately specified the land portion in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  26. 03-Nov-2023

    Appearance Of Party

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  27. 26-Oct-2023

    Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  28. 12-Oct-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  29. 26-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  30. 20-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  31. 08-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  32. 01-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  33. 22-Aug-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  34. 21-Jul-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  35. 07-Jul-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  36. 27-Jun-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  37. 19-Jun-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  38. 15-Jun-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  39. 05-Jun-2023

    Objection

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  40. 02-Jun-2023

    Objection

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  41. 01-Jun-2023

    Objection

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  42. 23-May-2023

    Hearing

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  43. 11-Apr-2023

    Written Statement

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  44. 01-Apr-2023

    OrdersView PDF

  45. 01-Apr-2023

    Summons

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  46. 31-Mar-2023

    Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  47. 29-Mar-2023

    OrdersView PDF

  48. 29-Mar-2023

    Summons

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  49. 28-Mar-2023

    Orders

    Addl.civil Judge And JMFC Court Bhatkal

  50. 25-Mar-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  51. 23-Mar-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 28/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court dismissed interim applications (I.A. No.III and V) filed by plaintiffs seeking injunction to restrain defendants from constructing a shop on jointly-owned property. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience in their favor, or irreparable loss, noting the defendants claimed oral partition of the property and questioned whether plaintiffs had adequately specified the land portion in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case