K. Veeranna S/o Late. Kaptral Basappa vs M. Maralusiddappa S/o Late. Mallal Sidramappa — 376/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,rule 1 and 2 R/w 151. Status: ISSUES-C. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAVN210031722024

ISSUES-C

Next Hearing

18th June 2026

Filing Number

376/2024

Filing Date

22-10-2024

Registration No

376/2024

Registration Date

22-10-2024

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, KUDLIGI

Judge

583-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUDLIGI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,rule 1 and 2 R/w 151

Petitioner(s)

K. Veeranna S/o Late. Kaptral Basappa

Adv. J.K.R and J.K.G

K. Pampanna S/o Late. Kaptral Basappa

K. Shanmukhappa S/o Late. Kaptral Basappa

Respondent(s)

M. Maralusiddappa S/o Late. Mallal Sidramappa

Smt. Eramma W/o Late. Devendrappa

M. Chandrashekhara S/o Late. Mallal Sidramappa

S. Umakanth S/o Late. Mallal Sidramappa

Smt. Neelamma W/o Late. Veerabasappa

Smt. Rathnamma W/o Thirukappa D/o Mallal Veeramma

Hearing History

Judge: 583-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUDLIGI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT

06-03-2026

ISSUES-C

13-02-2026

ISSUES-C

31-10-2025

ISSUES-C

19-09-2025

ISSUES-C

22-08-2025

FIRST HEARING/MAINTAINABILITY-C

Interim Orders

22-08-2025
Orders

Summary: The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for interim temporary injunction seeking to restrain defendants from interfering with a right of way through defendant's property to access plaintiff's land. The judge found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as they provided insufficient material evidence regarding the existence and location of the claimed easement right, and the sale deed purchasing the property did not document any such right of way. Consequently, the issues of balance of convenience and irreparable loss did not arise, and the application was dismissed without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for interim temporary injunction seeking to restrain defendants from interfering with a right of way through defendant's property to access plaintiff's land. The judge found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as they provided insufficient material evidence regarding the existence and location of the claimed easement right, and the sale deed purchasing the property did not document any such right of way. Consequently, the issues of balance of convenience and irreparable loss did not arise, and the application was dismissed without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, KUDLIGI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case