RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. vs SHRI.RAMCHANDRA DNAYANU PATIL — HCBM10006102026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173. Status: For Orders (Due Matters). Next hearing: : -.

For Orders (Due Matters) Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM010006102026

Filing Number

FA/392/2026

Filing Date

06-Jan-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe , National Lok Adalat

Coram

Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe , National Lok Adalat

Bench Type

Single

Category

FIRST APPEAL ( 53 )

Sub-Category

MACP - Single Bench ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.

    Adv. KALPANA TRIVEDI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHRI.RAMCHANDRA DNAYANU PATIL

  2. 2.MR. MANGESH DADASAHEB WALE

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-May-2026

    Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe,national Lok AdalatView PDF

    Case Summary: In First Appeal (Stamp) No.392 of 2026, Reliance General Insurance Co. Limited sought withdrawal of its appeal before the Bombay High Court's National Lok Adalat. On 9th May 2026, the appellant failed to appear despite initial video conferencing attendance and a court directive to appear physically at 1:30 p.m. The court adjourned the matter, directing that the appellant or its legal representative must appear physically at the next Lok Adalat hearing and posted the appeal accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Feb-2026

    At 3.00 P.M.

    Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Joshi

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    At 3.00 P.M.

    Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Joshi

  5. 14-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. JoshiView PDF

  6. 14-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 06-Jan-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: In First Appeal (Stamp) No.392 of 2026, Reliance General Insurance Co. Limited sought withdrawal of its appeal before the Bombay High Court's National Lok Adalat. On 9th May 2026, the appellant failed to appear despite initial video conferencing attendance and a court directive to appear physically at 1:30 p.m. The court adjourned the matter, directing that the appellant or its legal representative must appear physically at the next Lok Adalat hearing and posted the appeal accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case