Dnyaneshwar Raghuram Bhandari 32yrs Occ.Saloon R/o.Kumbarwada Village Tq.Joida UK vs The Deputy Commissioner UK District Karwar — 194/2016
Case under Under Order Vii Rule 1 R.w Section 26 of the Cpc Section 78. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 28th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK410007232016
Next Hearing
28th March 2026
Filing Number
194/2016
Filing Date
21-10-2016
Registration No
194/2016
Registration Date
21-10-2016
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DANDELI
Judge
524-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, DANDELI
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dnyaneshwar Raghuram Bhandari 32yrs Occ.Saloon R/o.Kumbarwada Village Tq.Joida UK
Adv. RAJASHEKHAR ISHWRAPPA HARIJAN
Respondent(s)
The Deputy Commissioner UK District Karwar
The Chief Executive Officer Zilla Panchayat Uattar Kannada
The Tahashildar Joida Tq.Joida UK
The Executive officer Joida Taluk Joida UK
The Panchyat Development officer Kumbarwada Tq.Joida UK
Hearing History
Judge: 524-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, DANDELI
HEARING
Call On
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 02-03-2026 | Call On |
| 16-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 10-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 09-02-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case No.: O.S. 194-2016 (Civil Suit) Date: 10-01-2025 The court dismissed the petitioner's claim for allocation of a barber shop space under the village panchayat (gram panchayat). The court found that the petitioner failed to respond to multiple notices, did not provide written replies to show-cause notices, and did not adequately participate in the panchayat's general assembly proceedings. The court determined the petitioner had not paid the required rent and concluded the panchayat was justified in revoking the shop's allocation and recovering possession thereof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case No.: O.S. 194-2016 (Civil Suit) Date: 10-01-2025 The court dismissed the petitioner's claim for allocation of a barber shop space under the village panchayat (gram panchayat). The court found that the petitioner failed to respond to multiple notices, did not provide written replies to show-cause notices, and did not adequately participate in the panchayat's general assembly proceedings. The court determined the petitioner had not paid the required rent and concluded the panchayat was justified in revoking the shop's allocation and recovering possession thereof. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts