KANNAR BHARAT BHIMJI vs DINESHKUMAR THAVAR MAHESHWARI Advocate - R I SAMA — 105/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Status: Written Statement/Reply. Next hearing: 08th July 2026.
MACP - MAC PETITION
CNR: GJKT010007842025
Filing Number
105/2025
Filing Date
17-Feb-2025
Registration No
105/2025
Registration Date
17-Feb-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT BHUJ
Judge
29-4th Addl District Judge
Last updated 21-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KANNAR BHARAT BHIMJI
Adv. M B KHATANA
Respondent(s)
-
1.DINESHKUMAR THAVAR MAHESHWARI Advocate - R I SAMA
-
2.TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Adv. A A SAHEDANI
-
3.NODAL OFFICER TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
Adv. A A SAHEDANI
Case History
-
08-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-May-2026
Written Statement/Reply
7th Addl District Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Written Statement/Reply
7th Addl District Judge
-
04-Feb-2026
Written Statement/Reply
7th Addl District Judge
-
27-Jan-2026
Written Statement/Reply
7th Addl District Judge
-
09-Dec-2025
Written Statement/Reply
7th Addl District Judge
-
07-Oct-2025
Summons - Notice
7th Addl District Judge
-
05-Aug-2025
Summons - Notice
7th Addl District Judge
-
25-Mar-2025
OrderView PDF
Summary: In MACP No. 105/2025 before the 6th Auxiliary MACT Bhuj-Kutch, the presiding judge (Shilpa M. Kanabar) ordered that the matter be adjourned after May 2025 (end of the judge's tenure). The judge cited conflicts between local trial practices and Supreme Court directions on motor accident claims, and stated she cannot ethically continue handling cases under the current system. The case is kept on the same stage for resumption after the judge's posting concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Feb-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 105/2025
Summary: In MACP No. 105/2025 before the 6th Auxiliary MACT Bhuj-Kutch, the presiding judge (Shilpa M. Kanabar) ordered that the matter be adjourned after May 2025 (end of the judge's tenure). The judge cited conflicts between local trial practices and Supreme Court directions on motor accident claims, and stated she cannot ethically continue handling cases under the current system. The case is kept on the same stage for resumption after the judge's posting concludes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts