Smt. Pavithra vs Smt. Janaki Poojarthi — 94/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/S 26,OVII,R1. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 24th March 2026.
O.S - Original Suit
CNR: KAUP310007992021
Next Hearing
24th March 2026
Filing Number
94/2021
Filing Date
24-11-2021
Registration No
94/2021
Registration Date
25-11-2021
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,KUNDAPURA
Judge
515-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,KUNDAPURA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt. Pavithra
Adv. Mallyady Jayarama Shetty
Smt. Supritha
Minor Preethesh
Minor Pratheeksha
Minor Anisha
Respondent(s)
Smt. Janaki Poojarthi
Thimmappa Poojary
Basavaraj Poojary
Smt. Sujatha
Nagaraj Poojary
Suresh Poojary
Minor Aradhya
Smt. Jalaja
Smt. Sumathi
The Amasebail Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha ( Reg)
The Bank of Baroda Haladi Branch
Hearing History
Judge: 515-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,KUNDAPURA
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 19-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 19-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 05-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 05-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
This court order in Kannada (O.S. 94/2021) involves a property dispute concerning joint family assets and inheritance rights. The court examined evidence regarding the validity of two deeds (N.I-4 and N.I-5), property ownership claims, and the mental competence of a key witness. The court dismissed several false claims made by defendants 8 and 9, found that properties 25 and 26 belong to the joint family under the plaintiff's name, and ruled that the defendants lack authority over contested assets. The case proceedings concluded with findings against the defendant respondents' fabricated documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This court order in Kannada (O.S. 94/2021) involves a property dispute concerning joint family assets and inheritance rights. The court examined evidence regarding the validity of two deeds (N.I-4 and N.I-5), property ownership claims, and the mental competence of a key witness. The court dismissed several false claims made by defendants 8 and 9, found that properties 25 and 26 belong to the joint family under the plaintiff's name, and ruled that the defendants lack authority over contested assets. The case proceedings concluded with findings against the defendant respondents' fabricated documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts