Sri. Dayananda Holla vs Sri, Dayakara G. — 36/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U.Sec.,166. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.

CNR: KACM510000342025

EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

5/2025

Filing Date

24-01-2025

Registration No

36/2025

Registration Date

24-01-2025

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,NARASIMHARAJAPURA

Judge

1218-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NARASIMHARAJAPURA

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section U.Sec.,166

Petitioner(s)

Sri. Dayananda Holla

Respondent(s)

Sri, Dayakara G.

The Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited

Hearing History

Judge: 1218-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NARASIMHARAJAPURA

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE

20-02-2026

EVIDENCE

06-02-2026

EVIDENCE

30-01-2026

EVIDENCE

09-01-2026

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

06-06-2025
Issue
27-06-2025
Deposition
22-08-2025
Deposition
07-11-2025
Deposition
12-12-2025
Deposition

SUMMARY: In this civil case (MVC 36/2025) heard on 12-12-2025, the court examined witness testimony regarding an injury incident and claims of compensation. The court found that the second defendant made false statements regarding her annual income (claiming ₹4,80,000 when actually receiving ₹50,000 from BPL scheme) and provided misleading medical evidence. The court concluded that the second defendant is not entitled to any compensation from the first defendant, as the evidence did not establish liability. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: In this civil case (MVC 36/2025) heard on 12-12-2025, the court examined witness testimony regarding an injury incident and claims of compensation. The court found that the second defendant made false statements regarding her annual income (claiming ₹4,80,000 when actually receiving ₹50,000 from BPL scheme) and provided misleading medical evidence. The court concluded that the second defendant is not entitled to any compensation from the first defendant, as the evidence did not establish liability. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,NARASIMHARAJAPURA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case