Mahalaxmi W/o Shankargouda D/o late Sharnappa vs Bassamma W/o Ningappa D/o late Sharnappa — 111/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o,7,Rule,1,of,cpc. Disposed: Contested--Partly Decreed. on 10th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAYG300005052022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
111/2022
Filing Date
21-04-2022
Registration No
111/2022
Registration Date
21-04-2022
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHORAPUR
Judge
765-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHORAPUR
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Partly Decreed.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mahalaxmi W/o Shankargouda D/o late Sharnappa
Adv. DTB
Respondent(s)
Bassamma W/o Ningappa D/o late Sharnappa
Shivamma W/o Basappa ( D/o Sharanappa) Sukla
Basavantharaya S/o Late Sharanappa Telginmani
Parusharam S/o late Sharanappa Telaginamani
Awwamma W/o Mudakappa (D/o Late Sharanappa)
Annapurana W/o Sabanna D/o late Sharnappa
Muttappa S/o late Sharnappa
Parusharam S/o Hulgappa
Shridevi W/o Yenakanna (D/o Sharanappa)
Hearing History
Judge: 765-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,SHORAPUR
Disposed
JUDGEMENT-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT-CIVIL | |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 03-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 27-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court decreed the plaintiff's partition suit, entitling her to a 1/9th equal share in two ancestral joint family properties. However, the court upheld the validity of a 2019 sale of a third property by defendant No.4 (the family karta) to defendant No.9, finding it was executed for legitimate family financial necessities such as marriage expenses and debt repayment, making defendant No.9 a bona fide purchaser whose claim binds all joint family members. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court decreed the plaintiff's partition suit, entitling her to a 1/9th equal share in two ancestral joint family properties. However, the court upheld the validity of a 2019 sale of a third property by defendant No.4 (the family karta) to defendant No.9, finding it was executed for legitimate family financial necessities such as marriage expenses and debt repayment, making defendant No.9 a bona fide purchaser whose claim binds all joint family members. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts