Chandrashekar N S vs The State of Karnataka Rep.by Chief Secretary — 107/2023
Case under Under Section Vii Rule 1 and 2 of Cpc Section 26. Disposed: Contested--PLAINT REJECTED on 16th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KABR610016542023
Filing Number
107/2023
Filing Date
02-Mar-2023
Registration No
107/2023
Registration Date
03-Mar-2023
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NELAMANGALA
Judge
104-Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
16-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PLAINT REJECTED
Last updated 29-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Chandrashekar N S
Adv. B Sathish
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Karnataka Rep.by Chief Secretary
-
2.Principle Secretary of Panchayath Raj Department
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Jun-2026
Orders
-
16-Jun-2026
Orders
Case Summary: OS.No.107/2023 Court Decision: The Nelamangala Civil Court rejected the plaint filed by Chandrashekar N.S. against Karnataka State and the Panchayathi Development Officer. The court allowed the defendant's application to dismiss the case, finding that an alternative statutory remedy existed under Section 269 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, making the civil suit unmaintainable. Key Reasoning: The plaintiff sought permanent injunction against demolition notices for unauthorized construction. However, the court determined that since the Panchayat Development Officer's orders were appealable to the Executive Officer under Section 269 of the Act, the plaintiff should have pursued that remedy instead of filing a civil suit. The court noted that the plaintiff had already challenged the order before the Executive Officer (dismissed) and filed a writ petition in the High Court (stayed), leaving no jurisdiction with the civil court to adjudicate the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Jun-2026
Disposed
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
15-Jun-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Jun-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
11-Jun-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
25-Apr-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Apr-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
26-Mar-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
23-Mar-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
29-Jan-2026
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Dec-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
06-Dec-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Dec-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
29-Oct-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
28-Oct-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
25-Sep-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Aug-2025
Orders
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Jul-2025
Reply
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
16-Jun-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Apr-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
24-Mar-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
11-Mar-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
01-Mar-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Feb-2025
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Feb-2025
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Jan-2025
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Jan-2025
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
16-Nov-2024
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
20-Sep-2024
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
29-Jul-2024
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Jun-2024
Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
28-May-2024
Written Statement And Objection
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
27-Apr-2024
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Apr-2024
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
06-Feb-2024
Summons
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
07-Dec-2023
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
07-Sep-2023
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Jul-2023
Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
10-Jul-2023
Amended Plaint
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Jun-2023
Amended Plaint
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
30-May-2023
Amended Plaint
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Mar-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Mar-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 107/2023
Case Summary: OS.No.107/2023 Court Decision: The Nelamangala Civil Court rejected the plaint filed by Chandrashekar N.S. against Karnataka State and the Panchayathi Development Officer. The court allowed the defendant's application to dismiss the case, finding that an alternative statutory remedy existed under Section 269 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, making the civil suit unmaintainable. Key Reasoning: The plaintiff sought permanent injunction against demolition notices for unauthorized construction. However, the court determined that since the Panchayat Development Officer's orders were appealable to the Executive Officer under Section 269 of the Act, the plaintiff should have pursued that remedy instead of filing a civil suit. The court noted that the plaintiff had already challenged the order before the Executive Officer (dismissed) and filed a writ petition in the High Court (stayed), leaving no jurisdiction with the civil court to adjudicate the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts