RANGARAJE ARASU vs YUVARAJ S — 3889/2024
Case under U/s 166 Mv Act Section MV ACT. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 11th March 2026.
M.V.C. - ACCIDENT CLAIM CASES UNDER MOTOR VEHICLES ACT
CNR: KABC020291612024
Filing Number
3874/2024
Filing Date
31-05-2024
Registration No
3889/2024
Registration Date
01-06-2024
Court
CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU
Judge
39-SCCH - 18 - III ADDL. Judge, Court of Small Causes and ACJM
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RANGARAJE ARASU
Adv. M.N. NANDINI URS
Respondent(s)
YUVARAJ S
UNITED INDIA INS CO LTD
Hearing History
Judge: 39-SCCH - 18 - III ADDL. Judge, Court of Small Causes and ACJM
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
evidence
evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 26-02-2026 | evidence |
| 19-02-2026 | evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary In this Motor Accident Claim (MVC No: 3889/2024), the court heard testimony from a medical witness regarding disability assessment of the claimant. The defendant's counsel challenged the medical evidence, contending that the disability assessment was incomplete due to insufficient examination and missing X-rays, and argued that the witness may have provided false testimony to assist the claimant. The court's order indicates that the first opposing party proceeded ex-parte (without proper representation), and noted concerns about the reliability and completeness of the medical evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In this Motor Accident Claim (MVC No: 3889/2024), the court heard testimony from a medical witness regarding disability assessment of the claimant. The defendant's counsel challenged the medical evidence, contending that the disability assessment was incomplete due to insufficient examination and missing X-rays, and argued that the witness may have provided false testimony to assist the claimant. The court's order indicates that the first opposing party proceeded ex-parte (without proper representation), and noted concerns about the reliability and completeness of the medical evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts