JETENDRABHAI JAGDISHBHAI ROHIT vs RITESH DINESHBHAI GOHIL — 1200/2025

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

Case disposed

MACP - MAC PETITION

CNR: GJKH010080632025

Filing Number

1200/2025

Filing Date

09-Dec-2025

Registration No

1200/2025

Registration Date

09-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 16-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JETENDRABHAI JAGDISHBHAI ROHIT

    Adv. B M ROHIT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RITESH DINESHBHAI GOHIL

  2. 2.GO DIGIT GENERAL ISURANCE Ltd

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary: The Lok Adalat (M.A.C.T., Nadiad) approved a compromise settlement in a motor accident compensation case where the applicant and insurance company agreed to settle their dispute. The applicant is entitled to recover Rs. 2,40,000/- (including Rs. 20,000/- for medical bills) from the respondents jointly and severally, which the insurance company must deposit in the designated District Bank account per Supreme Court guidelines, with the petition disposed as compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  5. 21-Jan-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  6. 09-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 09-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1200/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Lok Adalat (M.A.C.T., Nadiad) approved a compromise settlement in a motor accident compensation case where the applicant and insurance company agreed to settle their dispute. The applicant is entitled to recover Rs. 2,40,000/- (including Rs. 20,000/- for medical bills) from the respondents jointly and severally, which the insurance company must deposit in the designated District Bank account per Supreme Court guidelines, with the petition disposed as compromised. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case