Smt.V.Saroja W/o Late V.Prasad Daughter in law of V.Yamunurappa vs Sri.V.Nagaraja S/o Late Valekar Phakkeerappa — 5/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 39,Rule,1,2,97. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 10th June 2026.

Case disposed

M.A. - Miscellanuous Appeals

CNR: KAVN310002012025

Filing Number

5/2025

Filing Date

04-Mar-2025

Registration No

5/2025

Registration Date

04-Mar-2025

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI

Judge

1213-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

Decision Date

10-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 39,Rule,1,2,97

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Smt.V.Saroja W/o Late V.Prasad Daughter in law of V.Yamunurappa

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sri.V.Nagaraja S/o Late Valekar Phakkeerappa

  2. 2.Sri.V.Yallanagouda S/o Nagaraja Valekar

  3. 3.Sri.Sanna Yamanurappa S/o Late Phakkeerappa

  4. 4.Sri.V.Mallanagouda S/o Late Phakkeereppa

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: MA No. 5/2025 The appellate court dismissed Smt. V. Saroja's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of her temporary injunction application. The court found no illegality in the trial judge's discretionary decision, noting that Saroja's claimed ownership relied on an unregistered Release Deed dated 08.09.1984, which legally requires registration and created chronological inconsistencies with subsequent property purchases. The appellate court confirmed the trial court's order, holding that since title was genuinely disputed, Saroja must prove ownership through proper legal documents at trial before obtaining injunctive relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Jun-2026

    Disposed

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  4. 23-Apr-2026

    Judgment/Final Order

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Judgment/Final Order

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  6. 18-Feb-2026

    Judgment/Final Order

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  7. 04-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  8. 22-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  9. 26-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  10. 12-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  11. 24-Sep-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  12. 05-Aug-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  13. 22-Jul-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  14. 02-Jul-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  15. 19-Jun-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  16. 03-Jun-2025

    Arguments

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  17. 07-Apr-2025

    First Hearing/Cognizance(cr)

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  18. 06-Mar-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  19. 04-Mar-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 5/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MA No. 5/2025 The appellate court dismissed Smt. V. Saroja's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of her temporary injunction application. The court found no illegality in the trial judge's discretionary decision, noting that Saroja's claimed ownership relied on an unregistered Release Deed dated 08.09.1984, which legally requires registration and created chronological inconsistencies with subsequent property purchases. The appellate court confirmed the trial court's order, holding that since title was genuinely disputed, Saroja must prove ownership through proper legal documents at trial before obtaining injunctive relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case