Venkataraman Narayan Shetty, Balegadde, Muguva, Honavar vs Nagaraj Mahabaleshwar Bhat, Bengre, Bhatkal Advocate - Mahabaleshwar S Bhat — 62/2017

Case under U/sec 26 and Order Vii Rule 1 of Cpc Section ,. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAUK620009132017

HEARING

Next Hearing

06th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

62/2017

Filing Date

29-05-2017

Registration No

62/2017

Registration Date

29-05-2017

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HONAVAR

Judge

528-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C COURT,HONAVARA

Acts & Sections

U/Sec 26 and Order Vii Rule 1 of CPC Section ,

Petitioner(s)

Venkataraman Narayan Shetty, Balegadde, Muguva, Honavar

Adv. Ganesh V Bhat

Respondent(s)

Nagaraj Mahabaleshwar Bhat, Bengre, Bhatkal Advocate - Mahabaleshwar S Bhat

Hearing History

Judge: 528-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C COURT,HONAVARA

09-04-2026

HEARING

07-03-2026

HEARING

02-02-2026

HEARING

27-11-2025

HEARING

25-10-2025

HEARING

Interim Orders

28-05-2020
Issue
13-02-2024
Orders

Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, permitting correction of the survey number of the property from Sy. No. 295/1 of Mugva village to Sy. No. 463B of Hosakuli village, which was a clerical mistake necessary to determine the real question in controversy. The amendment was granted subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000, and the plaintiff was directed to furnish the amended plaint on the next date of hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, permitting correction of the survey number of the property from Sy. No. 295/1 of Mugva village to Sy. No. 463B of Hosakuli village, which was a clerical mistake necessary to determine the real question in controversy. The amendment was granted subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000, and the plaintiff was directed to furnish the amended plaint on the next date of hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HONAVAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case