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.

Case disposed

R.A - Regular Appeals

CNR: KAYG210018252024

Filing Number

52/2024

Filing Date

08-Nov-2024

Registration No

51/2024

Registration Date

08-Nov-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHAHAPUR

Judge

1231-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED/GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 08-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section U/s,96,R/w,U/o,41,R1ofCPC

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shantamma W/o Ramanna Gudimani

    Adv. SRI T.NAGENDRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Mallikarjun S/o Ramanna Pujari,

  2. 2.Manamma W/o Honnappa

  3. 3.Shrishail S/o Durgappa Chinchodi,

  4. 4.Bhimaraya S/o Hayyalappa

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    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.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Judgement-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  6. 07-Mar-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  7. 03-Mar-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  8. 19-Feb-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  9. 18-Feb-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  10. 17-Feb-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  11. 12-Feb-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  12. 03-Feb-2026

    A.D.R.-civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  13. 21-Jan-2026

    A.D.R.-civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  14. 13-Jan-2026

    A.D.R.-civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  15. 05-Jan-2026

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  16. 15-Dec-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  17. 13-Dec-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  18. 28-Oct-2025

    Reffred to Lok Adalath

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  19. 13-Oct-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  20. 17-Sep-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  21. 02-Sep-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  22. 12-Aug-2025

    Arguments-Civil

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  23. 24-Jul-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  24. 03-Jul-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  25. 10-Jun-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  26. 24-Mar-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  27. 01-Mar-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  28. 25-Jan-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  29. 06-Jan-2025

    Notice

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  30. 16-Dec-2024

    Hearing

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  31. 11-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 08-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 51/2024

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.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case