Hanumanthappa Thirakappa Naykar alias Byadagi vs Ashok Ningappa alias Nilappa Kurubar Advocate - S N Barki — 1130/2019

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 166. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

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

CNR: KAHV200004702019

ARGUMENTS

Next Hearing

25th March 2026

Filing Number

1130/2019

Filing Date

03-09-2019

Registration No

1130/2019

Registration Date

17-09-2019

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BYADGI

Judge

1223-Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Byadgi

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

Hanumanthappa Thirakappa Naykar alias Byadagi

Adv. K.S.Naikar.

Respondent(s)

Ashok Ningappa alias Nilappa Kurubar Advocate - S N Barki

The Divisional Manager United india Insurance Co Ltd

Adv. P C Shigihalli

Hearing History

Judge: 1223-Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Byadgi

06-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

25-02-2026

Reply

21-01-2026

Reply

20-12-2025

Reply

06-12-2025

JUDGMENTS

Interim Orders

19-02-2025
Deposition
12-03-2025
Deposition
18-06-2025
Deposition
05-08-2025
Deposition

Case Summary Case No.: MVC 1130/2019 | Court: Senior Civil Judge & JMMFC, Badagi Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's claims for compensation in this motor vehicle accident case. The judge found significant inconsistencies in the witness testimony and evidence, particularly regarding the accident's cause, injuries sustained, and medical treatment. The court ruled that the defendant insurance company is not liable for compensation, dismissing the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No.: MVC 1130/2019 | Court: Senior Civil Judge & JMMFC, Badagi Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's claims for compensation in this motor vehicle accident case. The judge found significant inconsistencies in the witness testimony and evidence, particularly regarding the accident's cause, injuries sustained, and medical treatment. The court ruled that the defendant insurance company is not liable for compensation, dismissing the petition. 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, BYADGI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case