Lakhmana vs The Chief Manager, POWEGRID NM TRANSMISSION LIMITED Advocate - J Hudson Samuel and Partners — 99/2018

Case under U/s Section 19of,INDIAN,ELECTRICITY,ACT,U/S,16(3)of,INDIAN,TELEGRAPHIC,ACT. Status: ARGUMENTS.. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.

Misc - Miscellaneous Cases

CNR: KARN010021052018

ARGUMENTS.

Next Hearing

17th June 2026

Filing Number

99/2018

Filing Date

24-11-2018

Registration No

99/2018

Registration Date

24-11-2018

Court

PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA

Judge

812-PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

Acts & Sections

U/s Section 19of,INDIAN,ELECTRICITY,ACT,U/S,16(3)of,INDIAN,TELEGRAPHIC,ACT

Petitioner(s)

Lakhmana

Adv. M.E. NIJALINGAPPA

Respondent(s)

The Chief Manager, POWEGRID NM TRANSMISSION LIMITED Advocate - J Hudson Samuel and Partners

The Deputy General Manager, M/s Power Grid NM Transmission Ltd.,

Adv. J Hudson Samuel and Partners

Hearing History

Judge: 812-PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

22-04-2026

ARGUMENTS.

13-03-2026

ARGUMENTS.

13-02-2026

ARGUMENTS.

13-12-2025

EVIDENCE CIVIL

28-11-2025

EVIDENCE CIVIL

Interim Orders

30-03-2023
Deposition
15-11-2024
Deposition

Summary of Misc.99/18 - Lakhmana v. POWEGRID NM Transmission Limited As of the court order dated 15.11.2024, this case involves a dispute regarding land compensation. The petitioner Lakhmana claims that unauthorized amounts totaling ₹2,36,799 were deposited into an account related to his land (survey nos. 57/5 and 56/2). The respondent (POWEGRID) contested these claims regarding crop loss compensation (₹13,581) and boundary damage compensation (₹880). The court proceedings included witness examination and cross-examination; however, the case appears to be ongoing with no final judgment or dismissal order issued as of the latest court date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Misc.99/18 - Lakhmana v. POWEGRID NM Transmission Limited As of the court order dated 15.11.2024, this case involves a dispute regarding land compensation. The petitioner Lakhmana claims that unauthorized amounts totaling ₹2,36,799 were deposited into an account related to his land (survey nos. 57/5 and 56/2). The respondent (POWEGRID) contested these claims regarding crop loss compensation (₹13,581) and boundary damage compensation (₹880). The court proceedings included witness examination and cross-examination; however, the case appears to be ongoing with no final judgment or dismissal order issued as of the latest court date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case