RAJESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR vs IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Advocate - R G DAVE — 92/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 141. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 18th March 2026.
MACMA - MAC MISC. APPLICATION
CNR: GJKH180013662025
Filing Number
92/2025
Filing Date
09-12-2025
Registration No
92/2025
Registration Date
09-12-2025
Court
Addl. District Court,Kapadvanj
Judge
1-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR
Adv. R J MAKWANA
Respondent(s)
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Advocate - R G DAVE
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disposed
URGENT HEARING
URGENT HEARING
URGENT HEARING
URGENT HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | URGENT HEARING |
| 05-03-2026 | URGENT HEARING |
| 26-02-2026 | URGENT HEARING |
| 12-02-2026 | URGENT HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Additional District Court at Kapadwanj approved a compromise order in the insurance dispute between petitioner Rajeshkumar Rameshbhai Parmar and IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., directing the insurer to pay Rs. 3,90,450/- with Rs. 1,95,250/- disbursed directly to the petitioner and Rs. 1,95,200/- invested in a 5-year fixed deposit in his name. The court imposed conditions requiring personal verification at payment, prohibiting loans against the FD without tribunal permission, and directing the bank to credit periodic interest to the applicant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional District Court at Kapadwanj approved a compromise order in the insurance dispute between petitioner Rajeshkumar Rameshbhai Parmar and IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., directing the insurer to pay Rs. 3,90,450/- with Rs. 1,95,250/- disbursed directly to the petitioner and Rs. 1,95,200/- invested in a 5-year fixed deposit in his name. The court imposed conditions requiring personal verification at payment, prohibiting loans against the FD without tribunal permission, and directing the bank to credit periodic interest to the applicant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts