Smt.B.Kotramma vs The Tahasildar — 281/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o,7rule1,2,r/w,sec,26,151ofcpc. Status: ISSUES-C. Next hearing: 14th March 2026.
O.S. - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KAVN510023772022
Next Hearing
14th March 2026
Filing Number
292/2022
Filing Date
05-11-2022
Registration No
281/2022
Registration Date
08-11-2022
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARAPANAHALLI
Judge
254-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARAPANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt.B.Kotramma
Adv. Thippeswamy, S.G.
B. Menakshi
B.Jyothi
Respondent(s)
The Tahasildar
The Assistant Commissioner
Hearing History
Judge: 254-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARAPANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
ISSUES-C
ISSUES-C
AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C
AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C
AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | ISSUES-C |
| 28-01-2026 | ISSUES-C |
| 06-01-2026 | AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C |
| 16-12-2025 | AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C |
| 26-11-2025 | AWAITING SERVICES OF NOTICES/SUMMONS-C |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain the government defendants from interfering with their possession of disputed agricultural land (Sy.No.539/B). The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as the property is registered in the government's name and the Assistant Commissioner had already ordered cancellation of the land grant in September 2022, which the plaintiffs did not challenge through proper legal remedies. Accordingly, the temporary injunction application was dismissed with no order on costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain the government defendants from interfering with their possession of disputed agricultural land (Sy.No.539/B). The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as the property is registered in the government's name and the Assistant Commissioner had already ordered cancellation of the land grant in September 2022, which the plaintiffs did not challenge through proper legal remedies. Accordingly, the temporary injunction application was dismissed with no order on costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts