P Jayappa sonof P Hanumavva age 63 years vs sri Ontigodi veeranna son of late Ontigodi Veerabhadrappa — 180/2016
Case under Under Order 7 Rule 1 and 2 Read with Sec 26 of Cpc Section UO7RULE1AND2. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAVN300014382016
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
180/2016
Filing Date
28-07-2016
Registration No
180/2016
Registration Date
28-07-2016
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
Judge
584-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
P Jayappa sonof P Hanumavva age 63 years
Adv. SANNAKOTI VISHALAKSHI HANUMANTHAPPA
Respondent(s)
sri Ontigodi veeranna son of late Ontigodi Veerabhadrappa
The Panchyath develpment officer
Hearing History
Judge: 584-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
Disposed
APPEARANCE OF PARTIES/ADVOCATES-C
WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C
WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C
WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 12-03-2026 | APPEARANCE OF PARTIES/ADVOCATES-C | |
| 09-03-2026 | WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C | |
| 07-03-2026 | WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C | |
| 05-03-2026 | WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The Megha Lok-Adalath court allowed a compromise petition filed by all parties in O.S. No. 180/2016, after permitting Plaintiff No. 6 to represent minor Plaintiff No. 8 in the settlement. The court found the compromise petition to be legal and voluntary, and decreed the suit in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions, directing the drawing of a compromise decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary: The Megha Lok-Adalath court allowed a compromise petition filed by all parties in O.S. No. 180/2016, after permitting Plaintiff No. 6 to represent minor Plaintiff No. 8 in the settlement. The court found the compromise petition to be legal and voluntary, and decreed the suit in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions, directing the drawing of a compromise decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts