PRAGATI WD/O AJAYKUMAR TAYADE AND OTHER vs SADDAM HUSSAIN S/O AZIZ KHAN AND OTHERS — FA/881/2024

Case under Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 23rd August 2024.

Case disposed Next hearing 12-Sep-2024

CNR: HCBM040343102023

Filing Number

FA/24687/2023

Filing Date

14-Dec-2023

Registration No

FA/881/2024

Registration Date

28-Aug-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. W. Chandwani

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. W. Chandwani

Bench Type

Single

Category

COMPENSATION ( 7 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

23-Aug-2024

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act,1939 Section 173

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PRAGATI WD/O AJAYKUMAR TAYADE AND OTHER

    Adv. SANDEEP DEORAO CHOPDE

  2. 2.ASHAN S/O AJAYKUMAR TAYADE (MINOR, THR. NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SADDAM HUSSAIN S/O AZIZ KHAN AND OTHERS

  2. 2.NAVINKUMAR S/O ARUNKUMAR PETHE

  3. 3.NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., AKOLA THR. DIVISIONAL MANAGER

    Adv. DR. COLLIN C. ANTHONY(FOR R/

  4. 4.CHANDRABHAGA WD/O SHAMRAO DONGRE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Pravin S. PatilView PDF

    The High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) addressed a procedural issue regarding court fee deposit in First Appeal No. 881 of 2024. The court clarified that office objections regarding enhanced compensation were misconceived, as the court had merely apportioned compensation among the deceased's legal heirs rather than enhancing the total amount. The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to reconsider the fee deposit matter and pass appropriate orders after providing the appellant a hearing opportunity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Jan-2025

    Registrar (Judicial)View PDF

  4. 12-Sep-2024

    —

  5. 14-Dec-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/881/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) addressed a procedural issue regarding court fee deposit in First Appeal No. 881 of 2024. The court clarified that office objections regarding enhanced compensation were misconceived, as the court had merely apportioned compensation among the deceased's legal heirs rather than enhancing the total amount. The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to reconsider the fee deposit matter and pass appropriate orders after providing the appellant a hearing opportunity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case