Basamma W/o Naganna Kambar, Age 70 Yrs, Occ House hold vs Bassanna S/o Marlingappa, Age 50 Yrs, Occ Mason, Since deceased through LRs — 183/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o,41,Rule,20,R/w,Sec,151,of,CPC. Status: ARGUMENTS-CIVIL. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
Misc - Miscellaneous Cases
CNR: KAYG010016572023
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
183/2023
Filing Date
07-10-2023
Registration No
183/2023
Registration Date
09-10-2023
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR
Judge
936-PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE YADGIR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Basamma W/o Naganna Kambar, Age 70 Yrs, Occ House hold
Adv. K.N. TIMMAPURI
Rachappa S/o Naganna Kambar, Age 55 Yrs, Occ Agriculture
Mallikarjun S/o Naganna Kambar, Age 46 Yrs, Occ Agriculture
Khandappa S/o Naganna Kambar, Age 43 Yrs, Occ Agriculture
Basalingappa S/o Naganna Kambar, Age 46 Yrs, Occ Agriculture
Respondent(s)
Bassanna S/o Marlingappa, Age 50 Yrs, Occ Mason, Since deceased through LRs
Sharanappa S/o Marlingappa, Age 45 Yrs, Occ Labour
Monappa S/o Marlingappa, Age 42 Yrs, Occ Labour
Madhu S/o Mahadevappa, Age 50 Yrs, Occ Nil(Legal Heir)
Rajendra S/o Mahaveppa, Age 30 Yrs, Occ Labour
Suresh S/o Mahaveppa, Age 35 Yrs, Occ Labour
Gopalayya S/o Yellayya Bhalachekkar, Age 30 Yrs, Occ Nil
K.B. Bharti W/o K.B. Govardhan, Age 30 Yrs, Occ Nil
K.B. Govardhan S/o B. Ramkrishnayyal, Age 45 Yrs, Occ Agriculture
Hearing History
Judge: 936-PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE YADGIR
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ORDERS-CIVIL
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 12-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 07-03-2026 | ORDERS-CIVIL | |
| 20-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 24-01-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Yadgir, allowed I.A.No.1 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by condoning a 95-day delay in filing the miscellaneous petition. The court accepted the appellants' (Basamma & 4 others) explanation that financial difficulties and lack of knowledge caused the delay, finding sufficient grounds to excuse the late filing. Rejecting the respondents' objections, the court determined that dismissing the application would cause irreparable loss to the petitioners' right to have their restoration petition heard. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Yadgir, allowed I.A.No.1 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by condoning a 95-day delay in filing the miscellaneous petition. The court accepted the appellants' (Basamma & 4 others) explanation that financial difficulties and lack of knowledge caused the delay, finding sufficient grounds to excuse the late filing. Rejecting the respondents' objections, the court determined that dismissing the application would cause irreparable loss to the petitioners' right to have their restoration petition heard. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts