Hanamantha vs Banya S/o Ganya Rathod Age 55 years Occ Agriculture and private employee — 251/2013
Case under Sec of Cpc Section 39. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAYG030011692013
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
256/2013
Filing Date
12-09-2013
Registration No
251/2013
Registration Date
13-09-2013
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC YADGIR
Judge
334-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,YADGIR
Decision Date
07th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Hanamantha
Adv. Sharanappa M. Kandar
Respondent(s)
Banya S/o Ganya Rathod Age 55 years Occ Agriculture and private employee
Somya S/o Banya Age 37 years Occ Agril
Devibai W/o Gangaram (D/o Banya Rathod) Age 35 years Occ Housewife
Vijibai W/o Gopal Chavan (D/o Banya Rathod) Age 31 years Occ Housewife
Sonibai W/o Jayaram Chavan (D/o Banya Rathod) Age 29 years Occ Housewife
Shantibai W/o Somu Chavan (D/o Banya Rathod) Age 27 years Occ Housewife
Gowribai W/o Lachya Jadhav (D/o Banya Rathod) Age 25 years Occ Nil
Mannu S/o Banya Rathod Age 19 years Occ Agril
Khaja Bi W/o Mohammed Gouse Age 35 years Occ Agril
G. Nagabhushanam S/o. G. Chanchaiah, Age 27 years, Occ Agril
Mohammed Ibrahim S/o. Abdul Khader Gogi Age 65 years Occ Tailor
Subhash S/o Raghunathrao Dhadange Age 68 years Occ Agril and Business
Vithal Rao S/o Raghunath Rao Dhadange Age 65 years Occ Agril
Manik Rao S/o Raghunath Rao Dhadange Age 61 years Occ Agril
Dayanand S/o Raghunath Rao Dhadange Age 58 years Occ Agril
Dasharathrao S/o Raghunathrao Dhadange Age 55 years Occ Agril and Business
Chandrakant S/o Raghunathrao Dhadange Age 53 years Occ Agril and Business
Rajkumar S/o Raghunathrao Dhadange Age 51 years Occ Agril and Business
Hearing History
Judge: 334-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,YADGIR
Disposed
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 21-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 18-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 17-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Summary The Yadgiri District Court dismissed the plaintiff's partition suit, finding he failed to prove the disputed properties were ancestral assets belonging to a joint family. The court determined the properties belonged to defendant No. 1 individually, and that registered sales executed in 1995 and 1997 were valid and binding, with the suit now barred by the 12-year limitation period under Article 109 of the Limitation Act. The plaintiff was ordered to pay Rs. 3,000 costs each to defendants 10-18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Summary The Yadgiri District Court dismissed the plaintiff's partition suit, finding he failed to prove the disputed properties were ancestral assets belonging to a joint family. The court determined the properties belonged to defendant No. 1 individually, and that registered sales executed in 1995 and 1997 were valid and binding, with the suit now barred by the 12-year limitation period under Article 109 of the Limitation Act. The plaintiff was ordered to pay Rs. 3,000 costs each to defendants 10-18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts