Smt. Radhamani W/o. Diwakaran, 66 Yrs., Household, R/o. Haloor Oni, Mundgod. vs Smt. Indira W/o. Shyamprasad, 49 Yrs., Teacher, R/o. Hallor Oni, Mundgod. — 24/2019
Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK810003092019
Next Hearing
25th June 2026
Filing Number
24/2019
Filing Date
22-04-2019
Registration No
24/2019
Registration Date
22-04-2019
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUNDGOD
Judge
530-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT MUNDGOD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt. Radhamani W/o. Diwakaran, 66 Yrs., Household, R/o. Haloor Oni, Mundgod.
Adv. Shri. Basavaraj F. Poojar,
Respondent(s)
Smt. Indira W/o. Shyamprasad, 49 Yrs., Teacher, R/o. Hallor Oni, Mundgod.
Sri. Shyamprasad S/o. Kuttappan, 60 Yrs., R/o. Hallor Oni, Mundgod.
Sneha S/o. Shyamprasad, 23 Yrs., Private Empolyee, R/o. Haloor Oni, Mundgod.
Hearing History
Judge: 530-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT MUNDGOD
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 07-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 13-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 24/2019 Outcome: Petition dismissed. The court heard witness testimony on 13.02.2026 in this property dispute involving rental accommodation in Mundgod. The petitioner (Smt. Radhamani) claimed she was entitled to relief regarding disputed property rooms, alleging the respondents wrongfully retained her belongings. However, the court found the petitioner's claims to be false and unsupported by credible evidence. The court determined that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought in this case and accordingly dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 24/2019 Outcome: Petition dismissed. The court heard witness testimony on 13.02.2026 in this property dispute involving rental accommodation in Mundgod. The petitioner (Smt. Radhamani) claimed she was entitled to relief regarding disputed property rooms, alleging the respondents wrongfully retained her belongings. However, the court found the petitioner's claims to be false and unsupported by credible evidence. The court determined that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought in this case and accordingly dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts