N. Chandrashekhar S/o N. Venkateshwar Rao, Age 42 yrs, Occ Agri vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer — 235/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/O,21,Rule,11,of,CPC. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OTHERWISE on 02nd April 2026.

EX - Execution Petition Under Order

CNR: KAYG010022702025

Case disposed

Filing Number

238/2025

Filing Date

24-11-2025

Registration No

235/2025

Registration Date

19-12-2025

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR

Judge

1568-I ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,YADGIR

Decision Date

02nd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OTHERWISE

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section U/O,21,Rule,11,of,CPC

Petitioner(s)

N. Chandrashekhar S/o N. Venkateshwar Rao, Age 42 yrs, Occ Agri

Adv. B.M.PATIL

Respondent(s)

The Special Land Acquisition Officer

The Deputy Commissioner Yadgiri

The Chief Engineer KBJNL Canal Zone

The Executive Engineer KBJNL SLIP Division

Hearing History

Judge: 1568-I ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,YADGIR

02-04-2026

Disposed

25-03-2026

For Steps

13-03-2026

Objection

03-03-2026

Objection

24-02-2026

Appearance of Respondent

Final Orders / Judgements

02-04-2026
Orders

The court dismissed the respondent's application seeking attachment of movable properties under CPC Rule 43 due to procedural defects in the affidavit, including improper form, unsigned documents, unidentified properties, and incorrectly mentioned E.P. numbers. The judge ruled that the respondent failed to take necessary proper steps against the judgment debtors and therefore dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the respondent's application seeking attachment of movable properties under CPC Rule 43 due to procedural defects in the affidavit, including improper form, unsigned documents, unidentified properties, and incorrectly mentioned E.P. numbers. The judge ruled that the respondent failed to take necessary proper steps against the judgment debtors and therefore dismissed the petition. 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

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case