Ambigara Basappa S/o Late Ambigara Hanumanthappa vs Ambigara Ramappa S/o Late Ballappa — 235/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/O,VII,RULE,1AND2. Status: EVIDENCE-C. Next hearing: 21st April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAVN300022932025
Next Hearing
21st April 2026
Filing Number
234/2025
Filing Date
06-11-2025
Registration No
235/2025
Registration Date
06-11-2025
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
Judge
584-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ambigara Basappa S/o Late Ambigara Hanumanthappa
Adv. K. SUJATHA
Respondent(s)
Ambigara Ramappa S/o Late Ballappa
Ambigara Eshappa S/o. Late Ballappa
Geeresha S/o. Ambigara Eshappa
Raghavendra S/o. Ambigara Ramappa
Karnesha S/o. Ambigara Ramappa
Appanna S/o Eshappa
Balappa S/o. Ambigara Ramappa
Kariyappa S/o. Ramappa
Hearing History
Judge: 584-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
EVIDENCE-C
EVIDENCE-C
WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C
ORDERS
ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE-C |
| 19-02-2026 | EVIDENCE-C |
| 19-01-2026 | WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C |
| 17-01-2026 | ORDERS |
| 14-01-2026 | ORDERS |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's application (I.A. No. III) seeking temporary injunction to restrain defendants from further construction on a disputed property. The judge found the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as he could not produce documents proving his possession and exact boundaries of the property in question. Additionally, the application was barred by the principle of res judicata, since an earlier identical application (I.A. No. II) had been dismissed on December 10, 2025, and the plaintiff had not challenged that order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's application (I.A. No. III) seeking temporary injunction to restrain defendants from further construction on a disputed property. The judge found the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as he could not produce documents proving his possession and exact boundaries of the property in question. Additionally, the application was barred by the principle of res judicata, since an earlier identical application (I.A. No. II) had been dismissed on December 10, 2025, and the plaintiff had not challenged that order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts