ANIL RAMESH KUMAR SINGH vs MILIND TRAVELS AND ANR. Advocate - Leena Laxman Kavankar — FA/1911/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173. Next hearing: 07th May 2026.

Next hearing 07-May-2026

CNR: HCBM010405992025

Filing Number

FA/25768/2025

Filing Date

25-Jul-2025

Registration No

FA/1911/2025

Registration Date

29-Sep-2025

Judge

Dr.M.S. Deshpande, Registrar (Judicial - II)

Coram

Dr.M.S. Deshpande, Registrar (Judicial - II)

Bench Type

Single

Category

FIRST APPEAL ( 53 )

Sub-Category

MACP - Single Bench ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ANIL RAMESH KUMAR SINGH

    Adv. T J Mendon

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MILIND TRAVELS AND ANR. Advocate - Leena Laxman Kavankar

  2. 2.RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.

Case History

  1. 07-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 07-May-2026

    For Orders (Regular)

    Dr.M.S. Deshpande, Registrar (Judicial - II)

  3. 23-Apr-2026

    Dr.M.S. Deshpande, Registrar (Judicial - II)View PDF

    The High Court of Bombay's order in FA/1911/2025 (23/04/2026) found that notice to respondent No. 1 was not properly served—the bailiff's affixing of notice on the outer door was deemed ineffective service as the respondent was not present. The court directed the appellant's advocate to attempt proper service within two weeks as a final opportunity, warning that failure to serve the unserved respondent will result in dismissal of the First Appeal. Subsequently, respondent No. 1's counsel appeared and filed a Vakalatnama; appeal copies are to be provided after verification. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 22-Apr-2026

    For Orders (Regular)

    Shri. P.P. Jadhav, I/C(Reg-Judl II)

  5. 25-Feb-2026

    Shri. P.P. Jadhav, I/C(Reg-Judl II)View PDF

  6. 27-Jan-2026

    For Orders (Regular)

    Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl II)

  7. 15-Dec-2025

    Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl II)View PDF

  8. 15-Dec-2025

    For Orders (Regular)

    Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl II)

  9. 06-Oct-2025

    Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl II)View PDF

  10. 06-Oct-2025

    For Orders (Regular)

    Shri. S.R. Agrawal, Registrar(Judl II)

  11. 29-Sep-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 12-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Shivkumar DigeView PDF

  13. 25-Jul-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/1911/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay's order in FA/1911/2025 (23/04/2026) found that notice to respondent No. 1 was not properly served—the bailiff's affixing of notice on the outer door was deemed ineffective service as the respondent was not present. The court directed the appellant's advocate to attempt proper service within two weeks as a final opportunity, warning that failure to serve the unserved respondent will result in dismissal of the First Appeal. Subsequently, respondent No. 1's counsel appeared and filed a Vakalatnama; appeal copies are to be provided after verification. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case