MUKESHBHAI SANTILAL BHAVSAR vs PIYUSHBHAI HIMMATBHAI KAKANI Advocate - K K PATEL — 1455/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 164. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

MACP - MAC PETITION

CNR: GJAH010074152025

Filing Number

1455/2025

Filing Date

17-Sep-2025

Registration No

1455/2025

Registration Date

17-Sep-2025

Court

Ahmedabad District

Judge

2-10th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 15-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 164

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUKESHBHAI SANTILAL BHAVSAR

    Adv. P H AGRAWAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PIYUSHBHAI HIMMATBHAI KAKANI Advocate - K K PATEL

  2. 2.KOMALBEN PIYUSHBHAI KAKANI

    Adv. K K PATEL

  3. 3.TATA AIG GENRAL INSAURANCE CO. LTD.

    Adv. H J PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The MAC Tribunal approved a compromise settlement between the claimant and TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. for Rs. 2,40,000 as full and final compensation. The insurance company must pay within 3 months from the compromise date, with 9% per annum simple interest applicable if payment is delayed; court fees shall be refunded and parties bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    10th Addl District Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Reply

    10th Addl District Judge

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Reply

    10th Addl District Judge

  6. 14-Nov-2025

    Reply

    4th Addl District Judge

  7. 17-Sep-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 17-Sep-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1455/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The MAC Tribunal approved a compromise settlement between the claimant and TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. for Rs. 2,40,000 as full and final compensation. The insurance company must pay within 3 months from the compromise date, with 9% per annum simple interest applicable if payment is delayed; court fees shall be refunded and parties bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case