NAGARATHNA BAJANTRI vs RYBLU LOGISTICS PVT LTD., — 92/2023
Case under U/s 22 of the Employees Compensation Act Section ECACT. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 01st April 2026.
ECA - EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION APPLICATION
CNR: KABC020354292023
Next Hearing
01st April 2026
Filing Number
98/2023
Filing Date
08-11-2023
Registration No
92/2023
Registration Date
08-11-2023
Court
CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU
Judge
39-SCCH - 18 - III ADDL. Judge, Court of Small Causes and ACJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NAGARATHNA BAJANTRI
Adv. T.V. RAMESH
SRUSHTI BAJANTRI
SINCHANA BASAVARAJ BAJANTRI
SEVANTHI BASAVARAJ BAJANTRI
MUTHUSWAMY BASAVARAJ BAJANTRI
Respondent(s)
RYBLU LOGISTICS PVT LTD.,
ROYAL SUN GEN INSU CO LTD
HULAGAPPA
YALLAVVA
Hearing History
Judge: 39-SCCH - 18 - III ADDL. Judge, Court of Small Causes and ACJM
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 12-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 10-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 06-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 04-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: ECA No. 92/2023, RW-4 | Date: 25-02-2026 The court examined cross-examination evidence in an insurance claim dispute arising from a vehicle accident. The court recorded detailed witness testimony regarding driver identity discrepancies, accident circumstances, and insurance policy coverage, while noting evidentiary gaps concerning seized items and compensation details. Outcome: The case was adjourned for further proceedings. Party objections were taken note of; Defendant 1's objection was dismissed as ex-parte, and Defendants 3-4 were found absent. No cross-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: ECA No. 92/2023, RW-4 | Date: 25-02-2026 The court examined cross-examination evidence in an insurance claim dispute arising from a vehicle accident. The court recorded detailed witness testimony regarding driver identity discrepancies, accident circumstances, and insurance policy coverage, while noting evidentiary gaps concerning seized items and compensation details. Outcome: The case was adjourned for further proceedings. Party objections were taken note of; Defendant 1's objection was dismissed as ex-parte, and Defendants 3-4 were found absent. No cross-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts