Nagendra Ganapathi Hegde, A/a 45 yrs, R/at Kadle Uppale Hebbankeri, Honnavar Taluk vs Ganapati Subbaiah Yane Subray Hegde, A/a 73 yrs, R/at Hegde Mane Keri, Kadatoka, Honnavar Taluk — 79/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7Rule1and2. Status: AMENDMENT OF PLAINT/COMPLAINT/WS. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK910027202021
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
79/2021
Filing Date
28-09-2021
Registration No
79/2021
Registration Date
28-09-2021
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDDAPUR
Judge
531-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. and JMFC SIDDAPUR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Nagendra Ganapathi Hegde, A/a 45 yrs, R/at Kadle Uppale Hebbankeri, Honnavar Taluk
Adv. VISHWANATH S HEGDE
Respondent(s)
Ganapati Subbaiah Yane Subray Hegde, A/a 73 yrs, R/at Hegde Mane Keri, Kadatoka, Honnavar Taluk
Bhagirathi Ganapathi Hegde, A/a 68 yrs, R/at Hegde Mane Keri Kadatoka, Honnavara Taluk
Nethravathi Narayan Bhat, A/a 49 yrs, R/at Idagundi, Yallapur Taluk
Bhuvaneshwari Hanumantha Gouda, A/a 37 yrs, R/at Golimakkei, Siddapur Taluk
Ishwar Rama Naik, A/a 61 yrs, R/at Geejagar Muttige, Siddapur Taluk
Shridhar Mahabaleshwar Hegde, A/a 45 yrs, R/at Sunkasale, Hasamanju Village, Bilagi Post, Siddapur
Hearing History
Judge: 531-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. and JMFC SIDDAPUR
AMENDMENT OF PLAINT/COMPLAINT/WS
AMENDMENT OF PLAINT/COMPLAINT/WS
STEPS
STEPS
STEPS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-06-2026 | AMENDMENT OF PLAINT/COMPLAINT/WS |
| 02-05-2026 | AMENDMENT OF PLAINT/COMPLAINT/WS |
| 15-04-2026 | STEPS |
| 06-04-2026 | STEPS |
| 01-04-2026 | STEPS |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: OS 79/2021 Court: Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Siddapur Date: 1 October 2024 Outcome: Application (IA No. IV) filed by Defendant No. 5 to reject the plaint under CPC Order VII Rule 11(d) was dismissed. The plaintiff's suit proceeds to trial, with evidence hearing scheduled for 28 October 2024. Key Issue: Defendant No. 5 argued the suit was barred because plaintiff was not a party to an earlier compromise decree (OS 31/2020) and therefore cannot challenge it. The court rejected this reasoning, holding that plaintiff's rights as a coparcener in ancestral property exist independently of the compromise decree and require full trial determination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OS 79/2021 Court: Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Siddapur Date: 1 October 2024 Outcome: Application (IA No. IV) filed by Defendant No. 5 to reject the plaint under CPC Order VII Rule 11(d) was dismissed. The plaintiff's suit proceeds to trial, with evidence hearing scheduled for 28 October 2024. Key Issue: Defendant No. 5 argued the suit was barred because plaintiff was not a party to an earlier compromise decree (OS 31/2020) and therefore cannot challenge it. The court rejected this reasoning, holding that plaintiff's rights as a coparcener in ancestral property exist independently of the compromise decree and require full trial determination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts