Raja Reddy vs N.Sreenivasa Reddy — 100007/2015
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 96order41Rule1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
AS - Appeal Suit
CNR: TNKI050000202015
Next Hearing
11th June 2026
Filing Date
06-04-2015
Registration No
100007/2015
Registration Date
10-04-2015
Court
Sub Court, Hosur
Judge
6-Additional Subordinate Judge, Hosur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Raja Reddy
Adv. M.Rajendaran
Respondent(s)
N.Sreenivasa Reddy
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Additional Subordinate Judge, Hosur
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Enquiry
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 22-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 09-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-03-2026 | Enquiry |
| 26-02-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Interim Orders
CASE SUMMARY: 100007/2015 The appeal filed by Raja Reddy (defendant) against the trial court's judgment in a property dispute has been allowed and set aside. The trial court had decreed the suit in favor of N. Sreenivasa Reddy (plaintiff), granting declaration of title and permanent injunction. The appellate court found the trial court failed to properly appreciate the defendants' genealogical evidence and failed to determine the original property owner. The case is remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal, with directions to permit both parties to file genealogies, frame additional issues, adduce evidence, and decide the matter afresh. No cost awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: 100007/2015 The appeal filed by Raja Reddy (defendant) against the trial court's judgment in a property dispute has been allowed and set aside. The trial court had decreed the suit in favor of N. Sreenivasa Reddy (plaintiff), granting declaration of title and permanent injunction. The appellate court found the trial court failed to properly appreciate the defendants' genealogical evidence and failed to determine the original property owner. The case is remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal, with directions to permit both parties to file genealogies, frame additional issues, adduce evidence, and decide the matter afresh. No cost awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts