SUDHABEN BALDEVBHAI SHARMA vs SHARMA AKSHAYKUMAR ARVINDBHAI — 1176/2025

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

Case disposed

MACP - MAC PETITION

CNR: GJKH010079322025

Filing Number

1176/2025

Filing Date

04-Dec-2025

Registration No

1176/2025

Registration Date

04-Dec-2025

Court

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUDHABEN BALDEVBHAI SHARMA

    Adv. M R SHUKLA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHARMA AKSHAYKUMAR ARVINDBHAI

  2. 2.SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD

    Adv. S R SHELAT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The Lok Adalat (M.A.C.T.) at Nadiad approved a compromise settlement in an accident compensation case where the applicant and insurance company agreed to settle their dispute. The applicant is entitled to recover Rs. 6,88,000/- (including Rs. 2,88,000/- in medical bills) from the respondents jointly and severally, to be deposited in a designated district bank account as per Supreme Court guidelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  5. 09-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  6. 08-Jan-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  7. 04-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 04-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1176/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Lok Adalat (M.A.C.T.) at Nadiad approved a compromise settlement in an accident compensation case where the applicant and insurance company agreed to settle their dispute. The applicant is entitled to recover Rs. 6,88,000/- (including Rs. 2,88,000/- in medical bills) from the respondents jointly and severally, to be deposited in a designated district bank account as per Supreme Court guidelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case