PONUGUNTI NAVEEN KUMAR vs MUNIRAJ V Advocate - H MUNISWAMY GOWDA — 5841/2024

Case under U/s 166 Mv Act Section MV ACT. Status: evidence. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

evidence Next hearing 25-Mar-2026 this date has passed

M.V.C. - ACCIDENT CLAIM CASES UNDER MOTOR VEHICLES ACT

CNR: KABC020478412024

Filing Number

5827/2024

Filing Date

06-Aug-2024

Registration No

5841/2024

Registration Date

06-Aug-2024

Court

CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU

Judge

35-Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

Last updated 20-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

U/s 166 Mv Act Section MV ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PONUGUNTI NAVEEN KUMAR

    Adv. SURESH M. LATUR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MUNIRAJ V Advocate - H MUNISWAMY GOWDA

Case History

  1. 25-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Summary This is a court order from a Small Causes Court in Bangalore (MVC No. 5841 of 2024) documenting witness examination (PW2) dated 06.03.2026. The witness (an employee of Intellirose) testified regarding employment-related documents and medical reimbursement policies, presenting salary slips and an employment letter as evidence. The opposing counsel cross-examined the witness, challenging the authenticity of certain documents (NP.29) and raising issues about medical reimbursement limits and the witness's authority to produce company documents without proper authorization. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  4. 12-Feb-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  5. 29-Jan-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  6. 17-Jan-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  7. 12-Jan-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  8. 12-Jan-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  9. 08-Jan-2026

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  10. 05-Dec-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  11. 05-Dec-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  12. 19-Nov-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  13. 06-Nov-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  14. 10-Oct-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  15. 19-Sep-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  16. 04-Sep-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  17. 04-Sep-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  18. 02-Aug-2025

    Summons

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  19. 01-Aug-2025

    Summons

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  20. 19-Jul-2025

    Hearing

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  21. 26-Jun-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  22. 24-Apr-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  23. 06-Mar-2025

    IssuesView PDF

  24. 06-Mar-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  25. 22-Jan-2025

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  26. 07-Dec-2024

    IssuesView PDF

  27. 07-Dec-2024

    evidence

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  28. 13-Nov-2024

    Summons

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  29. 07-Oct-2024

    Summons

    Scch -01 - Chief Judge, Court Of Small Causes

  30. 07-Aug-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 06-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 5841/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a court order from a Small Causes Court in Bangalore (MVC No. 5841 of 2024) documenting witness examination (PW2) dated 06.03.2026. The witness (an employee of Intellirose) testified regarding employment-related documents and medical reimbursement policies, presenting salary slips and an employment letter as evidence. The opposing counsel cross-examined the witness, challenging the authenticity of certain documents (NP.29) and raising issues about medical reimbursement limits and the witness's authority to produce company documents without proper authorization. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case