KAMLABEN RAMESHBHAI PARMAR vs SURAJSINH RAJENDRASINH PARMAR — 240/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

MACP - MAC PETITION

CNR: GJGN010040962025

Filing Number

242/2025

Filing Date

04-Nov-2025

Registration No

240/2025

Registration Date

04-Nov-2025

Court

DISTRICT COURT, GANDHINAGAR

Judge

1-Principal District & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 21-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAMLABEN RAMESHBHAI PARMAR

    Adv. G B SOLANKI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SURAJSINH RAJENDRASINH PARMAR

  2. 2.SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

    Adv. M J PARIKH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Gandhinagar approved a compromise settlement in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 240/2025, awarding the petitioner Rs. 3,00,000 (Three Lacs) compensation from the insurance company. The tribunal recorded the compromise as per Section 21 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, and ordered that no court fees be deducted from the compensation amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  5. 27-Jan-2026

    Lok Adalat

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  6. 24-Dec-2025

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  7. 04-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 04-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 240/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Gandhinagar approved a compromise settlement in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 240/2025, awarding the petitioner Rs. 3,00,000 (Three Lacs) compensation from the insurance company. The tribunal recorded the compromise as per Section 21 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, and ordered that no court fees be deducted from the compensation amount. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case