S N Revanasiddappa vs The Manager- The Wind World India Ltd., — 57/2018
Case under Indian Teligraph Act Section 16(3). Status: FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION. Next hearing: 04th July 2026.
Misc - Miscellaneous Cases
CNR: KADG010011372018
Next Hearing
04th July 2026
Filing Number
57/2018
Filing Date
21-02-2018
Registration No
57/2018
Registration Date
21-02-2018
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, DAVANGERE
Judge
890-II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DAVANGERE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
S N Revanasiddappa
Adv. MADHU N R
Respondent(s)
The Manager- The Wind World India Ltd.,
Hearing History
Judge: 890-II ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DAVANGERE
FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION
FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION
FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION |
| 13-03-2026 | FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION |
| 28-02-2026 | FOR SETTELEMENT / CONCILIATION |
| 13-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 24-01-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Misc.57/2018 S N Revanasiddappa v. The Manager - The Wind World India Ltd. The petitioner's case concerning alleged unauthorized power line construction across his agricultural land was dismissed. The court found that the respondent company had obtained proper regulatory approvals and compensation procedures were followed according to applicable guidelines. The witness testimony established that the 220 KV transmission line was laid with requisite 35-meter width compliance and that the petitioner had already received compensation for affected land. The petition was rejected based on insufficient evidence of wrongdoing by the respondent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Misc.57/2018 S N Revanasiddappa v. The Manager - The Wind World India Ltd. The petitioner's case concerning alleged unauthorized power line construction across his agricultural land was dismissed. The court found that the respondent company had obtained proper regulatory approvals and compensation procedures were followed according to applicable guidelines. The witness testimony established that the 220 KV transmission line was laid with requisite 35-meter width compliance and that the petitioner had already received compensation for affected land. The petition was rejected based on insufficient evidence of wrongdoing by the respondent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts