Shantamma W/o Ramanna Gudimani vs Mallikarjun S/o Ramanna Pujari, — 51/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/s,96,R/w,U/o,41,R1ofCPC. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED/GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 06th April 2026.

R.A - Regular Appeals

CNR: KAYG210018252024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

52/2024

Filing Date

08-11-2024

Registration No

51/2024

Registration Date

08-11-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHAHAPUR

Judge

1231-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

Decision Date

06th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED/GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section U/s,96,R/w,U/o,41,R1ofCPC

Petitioner(s)

Shantamma W/o Ramanna Gudimani

Adv. SRI T.NAGENDRA

Respondent(s)

Mallikarjun S/o Ramanna Pujari,

Manamma W/o Honnappa

Shrishail S/o Durgappa Chinchodi,

Bhimaraya S/o Hayyalappa

Hearing History

Judge: 1231-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

06-04-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

JUDGEMENT-CIVIL

18-03-2026

ARGUMENTS-Civil

07-03-2026

ARGUMENTS-Civil

03-03-2026

ARGUMENTS-Civil

Final Orders / Judgements

06-04-2026
Judgment

Court Summary The Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Shahapur allowed the plaintiff Shantamma's appeal and set aside the trial court's dismissal of her injunction suit. The court found that the plaintiff, as widow of the original allottee, had lawful possession of the property allotted by CMC Shahapur in 1999, and granted a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with her peaceful possession. The court relied on a prior 2003 judgment that had confirmed the plaintiff's husband's possession rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Shahapur allowed the plaintiff Shantamma's appeal and set aside the trial court's dismissal of her injunction suit. The court found that the plaintiff, as widow of the original allottee, had lawful possession of the property allotted by CMC Shahapur in 1999, and granted a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with her peaceful possession. The court relied on a prior 2003 judgment that had confirmed the plaintiff's husband's possession rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHAHAPUR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case