Babu Billava vs Ravi Naik Advocate - Malyady Jayarama Shetty — 3/2023

Case under Rul 230@a R/w 177 Imv Act Section 65. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 18-Jun-2026 this date has passed

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAUP400000072023

Filing Number

3/2023

Filing Date

05-Jan-2023

Registration No

3/2023

Registration Date

05-Jan-2023

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,BAINDURU

Judge

1528-CIVIL Judge And JMFC

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Rul 230@a R/w 177 Imv Act Section 65

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Babu Billava

    Adv. NSR BHAT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ravi Naik Advocate - Malyady Jayarama Shetty

  2. 2.Annappa Naik

    Adv. Malyady Jayarama Shetty

  3. 3.Venkayya Naik

  4. 4.Subbayya Naik

    Adv. Malyady Jayarama Shetty

  5. 5.Macha Naik

    Adv. Malyady Jayarama Shetty

  6. 6.Nagamma Naikthi

    Adv. Malyady Jayarama Shetty

  7. 7.Sandhya

    Adv. Lingappa

  8. 8.Ananda Naik

  9. 9.Bhaskar Naik

Case History

  1. 18-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  3. 06-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  4. 25-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  5. 20-Jun-2025

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  6. 20-Mar-2025

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  7. 18-Dec-2024

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  8. 27-Sep-2024

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  9. 03-Aug-2024

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  10. 19-Apr-2024

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  11. 15-Dec-2023

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  12. 24-Nov-2023

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  13. 03-Nov-2023

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  14. 14-Sep-2023

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  15. 18-Jul-2023

    OrdersView PDF

    Summary: The court partially allowed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction in a property dispute. The defendants are restrained from forcibly blocking, closing, or obstructing access to a Panchayath road on the southern side of the plaintiff's property until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case and that balance of convenience favored him, though it clarified the order does not prevent the Gram Panchayath from performing its statutory functions. The case is scheduled for next hearing on 14-09-2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  16. 18-Jul-2023

    For Comply

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  17. 15-Jul-2023

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  18. 24-Jun-2023

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  19. 19-Jun-2023

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  20. 25-May-2023

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  21. 12-Apr-2023

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  22. 04-Apr-2023

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  23. 14-Mar-2023

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  24. 06-Mar-2023

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  25. 22-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  26. 05-Jan-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court partially allowed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction in a property dispute. The defendants are restrained from forcibly blocking, closing, or obstructing access to a Panchayath road on the southern side of the plaintiff's property until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case and that balance of convenience favored him, though it clarified the order does not prevent the Gram Panchayath from performing its statutory functions. The case is scheduled for next hearing on 14-09-2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case