HANUMESH vs CHANNAMMA — C.A. No. 1220/2006
Case under Section XII-B. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010035212006
Filing Date
06-Feb-2006
Registration No
C.A. No. 1220/2006
Diary Number
3521/2006
Order Date
14-Feb-2019
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HANUMESH
Adv. V. N. RAGHUPATHY
Respondent(s)
-
1.CHANNAMMA
Adv. C. V. SUBBA RAO
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Feb-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Feb-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
-
13-Feb-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
-
12-Feb-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
-
07-Feb-2019
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
-
15-Jan-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Jan-2019
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
-
08-Mar-2018
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Aug-2016
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Aug-2016
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Feb-2006
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Feb-2006
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 1220/2006
CASE SUMMARY: Hanumesh v. Channamma (C.A. No. 1220/2006) The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remitted the Regular Second Appeal back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The dispute concerned ownership of Survey No.315 land (1 acre 3 guntas). The trial court had partly decreed the suit, awarding the western half to plaintiff Hanumesh; the High Court reversed this and limited defendant Channamma's rights to only 3 guntas on the eastern side. The Supreme Court found the High Court had criticized lower courts for not properly considering documentary evidence but failed to conduct its own review before allowing the appeal. The Court directed the High Court to reconsider the appeal afresh, within one year, after hearing both parties, without expressing any opinion on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts