Rocky Mascarenhas vs Henry Mascarenhas — 155/2025
Case under Civil Procedure Code 1908 Section 26, ORVII, RU1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUP020029672025
Filing Number
155/2025
Filing Date
18-Sep-2025
Registration No
155/2025
Registration Date
20-Sep-2025
Court
PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, UDUPI
Judge
508-Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
Last updated 12-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rocky Mascarenhas
Adv. CASTELINO HILDA
-
2.Celestine Dsouza
-
3.Helen Desa
-
4.Victor Mascarenhas
-
5.Annie Pinto
-
6.Jecintha Sequeira
-
7.Dolphy Mascarenhas
-
8.Presilla Mascarenhas
Respondent(s)
-
1.Henry Mascarenhas
-
2.Anthony Mascarenhas
-
3.Reeta Mascarenhas
-
4.Irene Philip Dsouza
-
5.Hilda Mascarenhas
Case History
-
25-Mar-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
DepositionView PDF
The witness was administered oath on 06-03-2026 and examination-in-chief was conducted by the plaintiff's counsel. Six documents (mutation register, survey records 124/2, 124/3, 124/12, 124/11, and departmental copy) were marked as exhibits. The case was adjourned to allow the defendant time to continue cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Evidence
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
10-Feb-2026
IssueView PDF
-
10-Feb-2026
Evidence
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
29-Jan-2026
Issues
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
13-Jan-2026
Issues
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
19-Dec-2025
Written Statement
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
26-Nov-2025
Written Statement
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
18-Oct-2025
Written Statement
Prl Senior CIVIL Judge And CJM Udupi
-
23-Sep-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-Sep-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 155/2025
The witness was administered oath on 06-03-2026 and examination-in-chief was conducted by the plaintiff's counsel. Six documents (mutation register, survey records 124/2, 124/3, 124/12, 124/11, and departmental copy) were marked as exhibits. The case was adjourned to allow the defendant time to continue cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts