Suresh Krishna Shirodkar,, Age. 55 years, R.o. Bidrolli village, Tq. Haliyal vs Parvati W.o Shankar Shirodkar, Age.45 years, R.o. Bidrolli village, Tq. Haliyal and others. — 13/2019

Case under Order 39 Rule 2a Cpc Section 39. Status: OBJECTION. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

Misc - Miscellaneous Cases

CNR: KAUK510007352019

OBJECTION

Next Hearing

25th March 2026

Filing Number

13/2019

Filing Date

28-08-2019

Registration No

13/2019

Registration Date

28-08-2019

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HALIYAL

Judge

525-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HALIYAL

Acts & Sections

Order 39 Rule 2a Cpc Section 39

Petitioner(s)

Suresh Krishna Shirodkar,, Age. 55 years, R.o. Bidrolli village, Tq. Haliyal

Adv. B .N. Ramesh

Respondent(s)

Parvati W.o Shankar Shirodkar, Age.45 years, R.o. Bidrolli village, Tq. Haliyal and others.

Shankar Hanumanth Shirodkar, 50y, Agriculture, R/o. Bidrolli, Haliyal.

Dayanand Shankar Shirodkar, 24y, agriculture, R/o. Bidrolli, Haliyal, U.K.

Hearing History

Judge: 525-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HALIYAL

17-03-2026

OBJECTION

06-03-2026

OBJECTION

19-02-2026

OBJECTION

07-02-2026

HEARING

24-01-2026

HEARING

Interim Orders

19-07-2024
Deposition

In Civil Misc No. 13/2019, the cross-examination of PW-1 (Plaintiff's Witness-1) was conducted on 19-07-2024 with the testimony translated from Marathi to Kannada. The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving construction of a wall and claims for compensation of Rs. 30,000, of which Rs. 10,000 was allegedly paid by the defendant. The court case was adjourned after recording the witness's examination-in-chief and cross-examination, with no substantive order granting or dismissing relief at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

In Civil Misc No. 13/2019, the cross-examination of PW-1 (Plaintiff's Witness-1) was conducted on 19-07-2024 with the testimony translated from Marathi to Kannada. The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving construction of a wall and claims for compensation of Rs. 30,000, of which Rs. 10,000 was allegedly paid by the defendant. The court case was adjourned after recording the witness's examination-in-chief and cross-examination, with no substantive order granting or dismissing relief at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HALIYAL All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case