Babu Bhandari, vs Smt. Rajeevi Advocate - T. Balachandra Shetty — 349/2017

Case under Under Section 26 , Order 7, Rule 1 and 2 of Cpc Section 65. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 23rd March 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAUP320016772017

JUDGEMENT

Next Hearing

23rd March 2026

Filing Number

351/2017

Filing Date

06-10-2017

Registration No

349/2017

Registration Date

09-10-2017

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA

Judge

518-II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

Acts & Sections

Under Section 26 , Order 7, Rule 1 and 2 of Cpc Section 65

Petitioner(s)

Babu Bhandari,

Adv. Hankunda Ashok Shetty

Raghu Bhandari, 63 years

Sujatha, 40 years

Respondent(s)

Smt. Rajeevi Advocate - T. Balachandra Shetty

Lolakshi, 42 years

Adv. T. Balachandra Shetty

Hearing History

Judge: 518-II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

06-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

05-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

23-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

19-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

07-01-2026

ARGUMENTS

Interim Orders

13-08-2018
Orders
13-08-2018
Orders
23-08-2018
Issue
23-08-2018
Issue
16-01-2019
Deposition
21-10-2022
Deposition
27-10-2023
Deposition
31-07-2024
Deposition
10-03-2025
Deposition

The case (O.S. No. 349/2017) concerns a property dispute involving family members where the court examined witness testimony on 10-03-2025 regarding inheritance rights and property division under the Land Reforms Act. The court found that both plaintiffs and defendants have equal rights to the disputed property, and determined that the second defendant's testimony was credible regarding property arrangements made in 1997 and 2010-11. The court directed the case to be referred to the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kadapa for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The case (O.S. No. 349/2017) concerns a property dispute involving family members where the court examined witness testimony on 10-03-2025 regarding inheritance rights and property division under the Land Reforms Act. The court found that both plaintiffs and defendants have equal rights to the disputed property, and determined that the second defendant's testimony was credible regarding property arrangements made in 1997 and 2010-11. The court directed the case to be referred to the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kadapa for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case