Pampanna Gowda S/o Late Rachan Gowda vs Dodda Sabanna S/o Ashappa Bharmannore — 79/2022
Case under Sec of Cpc Section U/O,VII,Rule,1,of,CPC. Status: EVIDENCE-CIVIL. Next hearing: 22nd April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAYG030011302022
Next Hearing
22nd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
78/2022
Filing Date
27-05-2022
Registration No
79/2022
Registration Date
13-06-2022
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC YADGIR
Judge
334-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,YADGIR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Pampanna Gowda S/o Late Rachan Gowda
Adv. MALLANNA B PATIL
Respondent(s)
Dodda Sabanna S/o Ashappa Bharmannore
Sanna Sabanna S/o Ashappa Bharmannore
Galeppa S/o Ashappa Bharmannore
Mallappa S/o Ashappa Bharmannore
Sidlingappa S/o Bangareppa Bharmannore
Chandappa S/o Mallappa Kuntimari
Sidlingappa S/o Mallappa Kuntimari
Sabanna S/o Mallappa Kuntimari
Hearing History
Judge: 334-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,YADGIR
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL | |
| 11-02-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL | |
| 03-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL | |
| 22-11-2025 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL | |
| 31-10-2025 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
Interim Orders
Summary: This is a civil property dispute order (O.S. No. 79/2022) dated 07-03-2026 from a Karnataka court. The court examined witness testimony regarding land ownership and found that the plaintiff does not have ownership or possession rights over the disputed property, which contains two structures. The court concluded that the first defendant has superior legal rights and is entitled to relief; consequently, the plaintiff's claims are dismissed and the plaintiff is barred from interfering with the defendant's possession of the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: This is a civil property dispute order (O.S. No. 79/2022) dated 07-03-2026 from a Karnataka court. The court examined witness testimony regarding land ownership and found that the plaintiff does not have ownership or possession rights over the disputed property, which contains two structures. The court concluded that the first defendant has superior legal rights and is entitled to relief; consequently, the plaintiff's claims are dismissed and the plaintiff is barred from interfering with the defendant's possession of the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts