Karibasappa Irani vs Shivaraju B.S Advocate - MALLIKARJUNA KANAVI., Prasanna Kumar S.. — 695/2016

Case under 166 of Mv Act Section 166. Status: ARGUMENTS CIVIL. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.

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

CNR: KADG310005802016

ARGUMENTS CIVIL

Next Hearing

09th June 2026

Filing Number

695/2016

Filing Date

27-09-2016

Registration No

695/2016

Registration Date

27-09-2016

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARIHAR

Judge

585-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARIHAR

Acts & Sections

166 of MV Act Section 166

Petitioner(s)

Karibasappa Irani

Respondent(s)

Shivaraju B.S Advocate - MALLIKARJUNA KANAVI., Prasanna Kumar S..

The Manager

Adv. SHANTHARAJAPPA H.C.

Hearing History

Judge: 585-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARIHAR

02-06-2026

ARGUMENTS CIVIL

16-05-2026

ARGUMENTS CIVIL

15-05-2026

ARGUMENTS CIVIL

08-05-2026

JUDGMENTS CIVIL

28-04-2026

JUDGMENTS CIVIL

Interim Orders

10-01-2018
Issue
20-02-2018
Deposition
18-03-2019
Deposition
21-05-2020
Orders
02-02-2021
Deposition
07-10-2022
Orders

Case Summary - 695/2016 The court allowed Respondent No.2's application (I.A.No.13) to amend the objection statement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC. The amendment sought to correct the identification of the vehicle driver from Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.3 (Abdul Razak), based on charge-sheet evidence and newly discovered information about fake driving license production by the insured. Respondent No.2 was directed to file the amended objection statement by the next hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary - 695/2016 The court allowed Respondent No.2's application (I.A.No.13) to amend the objection statement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC. The amendment sought to correct the identification of the vehicle driver from Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.3 (Abdul Razak), based on charge-sheet evidence and newly discovered information about fake driving license production by the insured. Respondent No.2 was directed to file the amended objection statement by the next hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARIHAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case