Ramachandra H. Shetty vs Shantha — 53/2016

Case under Civil Procedure Code 1908 Section 26. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAUP020004762016

ARGUMENTS

Next Hearing

25th March 2026

Filing Number

54/2016

Filing Date

18-06-2016

Registration No

53/2016

Registration Date

18-06-2016

Court

PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, UDUPI

Judge

508-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM UDUPI

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code 1908 Section 26

Petitioner(s)

Ramachandra H. Shetty

Adv. GANGADHAR ACHARYA H.M

Respondent(s)

Shantha

Udaya Poojary

Adv. DEVARAJA SHETTIGAR

Hearing History

Judge: 508-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM UDUPI

06-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

11-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

21-01-2026

ARGUMENTS

06-01-2026

ARGUMENTS

17-12-2025

ARGUMENTS

Interim Orders

19-03-2018
Deposition
17-04-2018
Deposition
31-05-2018
Deposition
24-07-2018
Deposition
05-10-2018
Deposition
25-10-2018
Deposition
14-01-2019
Deposition
04-12-2018
Deposition
19-03-2019
Orders
04-04-2019
Orders
18-10-2019
Orders
07-12-2019
Orders
29-01-2020
Orders
29-02-2020
Orders

Summary The court dismissed both interim applications (IA No. 22 and 23) filed by the plaintiff in a specific performance of contract suit. IA No. 22 sought to recall the 2nd defendant for further cross-examination based on recently traced documents, while IA No. 23 sought to reopen the case. The court found the plaintiff's applications to be vague, lacking specificity about documents, and tainted with mala fides given the pattern of multiple rejected applications filed after case posting for arguments. The matter was scheduled for final arguments by 07.03.2020. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court dismissed both interim applications (IA No. 22 and 23) filed by the plaintiff in a specific performance of contract suit. IA No. 22 sought to recall the 2nd defendant for further cross-examination based on recently traced documents, while IA No. 23 sought to reopen the case. The court found the plaintiff's applications to be vague, lacking specificity about documents, and tainted with mala fides given the pattern of multiple rejected applications filed after case posting for arguments. The matter was scheduled for final arguments by 07.03.2020. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, UDUPI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case