CANARA BANK, HOSADURGA BRANCH vs SMT RANJITHA L — 198/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,R,1. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OTHERWISE on 08th April 2026.

Case disposed

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KACD510008442026

Filing Number

198/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

198/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HOSDURGA

Judge

241-Addl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC

Decision Date

08-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OTHERWISE

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,R,1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CANARA BANK, HOSADURGA BRANCH

    Adv. D.V. ANJAN KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT RANJITHA L

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Apr-2026

    OrdersView PDF

    Case Summary: Canara Bank v. Smt. Ranjitha L (OS 198/2026) Court Decision: The court allowed Canara Bank's application to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit. The bank identified formal defects in the plaint—specifically, wrongly including another customer's outstanding amount (Tanuja) and technical errors that cannot be amended. The court found the grounds sufficient under CPC Order 23 Rule 1(3) and dismissed the suit as withdrawn, subject to limitation periods and payment of Rs. 100 costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Addl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 198/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Canara Bank v. Smt. Ranjitha L (OS 198/2026) Court Decision: The court allowed Canara Bank's application to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit. The bank identified formal defects in the plaint—specifically, wrongly including another customer's outstanding amount (Tanuja) and technical errors that cannot be amended. The court found the grounds sufficient under CPC Order 23 Rule 1(3) and dismissed the suit as withdrawn, subject to limitation periods and payment of Rs. 100 costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case