TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE OC. LTD. vs SMT. PURNIMA PRASHANT HAZRA AND ORS. — FA/625/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.

Next hearing 17-Jun-2026

CNR: HCBM010082042017

Filing Number

FA/5046/2017

Filing Date

17-Feb-2017

Registration No

FA/625/2026

Registration Date

10-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Joshi

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Joshi

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.TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE OC. LTD.

    Adv. Devendranath Shrikant Joshi

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT. PURNIMA PRASHANT HAZRA AND ORS.

  2. 2.MASTER PRADIP PRASHANT HAZRA

  3. 3.SHRI. BINAY NAGENDRA HAZRA

  4. 4.SMT. SUMATI BINAY HAZRA

  5. 5.SHRI. VISHWANATH K. POOJARI

Case History

  1. 17-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Bombay admitted Tata AIG General Insurance's First Appeal (ST) No. 5046 of 2017 against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order. The Court found that the Tribunal failed to frame issues or provide findings on whether the deceased was covered by the insurance policy. The Court issued notice to respondents and directed compilation of documents in private paper-book format within eight weeks, with the matter to be listed for hearing after filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Aug-2017

    R. M. Joshi, I/c. Registrar(Judl - II)View PDF

  4. 18-Aug-2017

    For Orders (Office Objections)

    Registrar(judicial II Fa)

  5. 28-Jul-2017

    —View PDF

  6. 07-Jul-2017

    —View PDF

  7. 17-Feb-2017

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/625/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Bombay admitted Tata AIG General Insurance's First Appeal (ST) No. 5046 of 2017 against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order. The Court found that the Tribunal failed to frame issues or provide findings on whether the deceased was covered by the insurance policy. The Court issued notice to respondents and directed compilation of documents in private paper-book format within eight weeks, with the matter to be listed for hearing after filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case