Muhammed Abdul Hakkim vs Deputy Collector, GAIL India Ltd., — 100405/2021
Case under Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act Section 10(2),(5). Status: For commission report. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
OP - ORIGINAL PETITION
CNR: KLML010043032021
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1049/2021
Filing Date
12-11-2021
Registration No
100405/2021
Registration Date
09-12-2021
Court
District and Sessions Court, Manjeri / Rent Control Appellate Authority,
Judge
4-Addl. District and Sessions Judge III / Rent Control Appellate Authority Manjeri
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Muhammed Abdul Hakkim
Adv. Siyamurshid K
Respondent(s)
Deputy Collector, GAIL India Ltd.,
GAIL India Ltd.,
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Addl. District and Sessions Judge III / Rent Control Appellate Authority Manjeri
For commission report
For commission report
For commission report
For evidence
For commission report
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 04-04-2026 | For commission report | |
| 09-03-2026 | For commission report | |
| 03-02-2026 | For commission report | |
| 19-12-2025 | For evidence | |
| 05-11-2025 | For commission report |
Interim Orders
Summary: In Original Petition No. 405/2021 before the Additional District Judge, Manjeri, the petition filed by Muhammed Abdul Hakkim against GAIL India Ltd. under the Petroleum & Minerals Pipe Lines Act 1962 was dismissed for default on February 13, 2025. The petitioner was absent and unrepresented during the hearing, while both respondents were represented by their advocates. The case was posted for evidence but dismissed due to the petitioner's non-appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In Original Petition No. 405/2021 before the Additional District Judge, Manjeri, the petition filed by Muhammed Abdul Hakkim against GAIL India Ltd. under the Petroleum & Minerals Pipe Lines Act 1962 was dismissed for default on February 13, 2025. The petitioner was absent and unrepresented during the hearing, while both respondents were represented by their advocates. The case was posted for evidence but dismissed due to the petitioner's non-appearance. 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 Court, Manjeri / Rent Control Appellate Authority, All courts →Explore other courts