SRI.C.KUMARA vs THE CHIEF SECRETARY — 187/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section UO7RULE1. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 04th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KACD220013562024
Filing Number
187/2024
Filing Date
18-Jun-2024
Registration No
187/2024
Registration Date
18-Jun-2024
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHALLAKERE
Judge
234-Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
04-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SRI.C.KUMARA
Adv. K.B.PRABHAKAR
-
2.GONCHITHAMMAIAH
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE CHIEF SECRETARY
-
2.DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
-
3.SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER
-
4.ZILL PANCHAYATH
-
5.TALUK PANCHAYATH
-
6.THAHASILDAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-Jun-2026
Judgment
Case Summary: OS No. 187/2024 Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit with costs. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish ownership of the disputed agricultural property because they did not prove the source of their predecessor's title—merely producing revenue records (RTC and mutation entries) is insufficient for establishing ownership as these are maintained for fiscal purposes only. Additionally, the suit was not maintainable because plaintiffs failed to comply with the mandatory two-month notice requirement under Section 80(1) of the CPC before suing government officials acting in their official capacity; the notice was issued after or within the notice period rather than before filing the suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-Jun-2026
Disposed
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
24-Apr-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
10-Apr-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
26-Mar-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Mar-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
07-Mar-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
29-Jan-2026
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Dec-2025
Judgement
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Nov-2025
Argument
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-Nov-2025
Argument
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
22-Sep-2025
Deposition
-
22-Sep-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
10-Sep-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
07-Aug-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
08-Jul-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
09-Jun-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
02-Apr-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
24-Feb-2025
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Dec-2024
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
04-Nov-2024
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
14-Aug-2024
Evidence
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
15-Jul-2024
Summons
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Jun-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-Jun-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 187/2024
Case Summary: OS No. 187/2024 Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit with costs. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish ownership of the disputed agricultural property because they did not prove the source of their predecessor's title—merely producing revenue records (RTC and mutation entries) is insufficient for establishing ownership as these are maintained for fiscal purposes only. Additionally, the suit was not maintainable because plaintiffs failed to comply with the mandatory two-month notice requirement under Section 80(1) of the CPC before suing government officials acting in their official capacity; the notice was issued after or within the notice period rather than before filing the suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts