Mahadev S/o Sadashiv Jagadale,Age 64 years,Occ Nil, vs Syed Dastagir S/o Sayyad Hassan Sab,Age 50 years,Occ Business — 1745/2023

Case under Sec151 Cpc Section 166. Status: FIRST HEARING. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.

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

CNR: KAKB210005502023

FIRST HEARING

Next Hearing

06th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1760/2023

Filing Date

29-11-2023

Registration No

1745/2023

Registration Date

13-12-2023

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND

Judge

681-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,ALAND

Acts & Sections

Sec151 CPC Section 166

Petitioner(s)

Mahadev S/o Sadashiv Jagadale,Age 64 years,Occ Nil,

Adv. Sri.Nagesh Reddy Advocate

Respondent(s)

Syed Dastagir S/o Sayyad Hassan Sab,Age 50 years,Occ Business

The Manager, SBI General Insurance Co.,Ltd., 9th floor, A and B wing, Falcom Business Centre,

Hearing History

Judge: 681-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,ALAND

04-04-2026

FIRST HEARING

07-03-2026

FIRST HEARING

30-01-2026

EVIDENCE.

17-01-2026

EVIDENCE.

25-11-2025

EVIDENCE.

Interim Orders

19-12-2023
Orders
02-09-2024
Issue
27-01-2025
Deposition
17-01-2026
Deposition

Summary: In MVC No. 1745/2023, heard on 17.01.2026, the court continued the main hearing on a motor vehicle accident compensation claim. The petitioner's affidavit was admitted as evidence. The defendant's counsel contested the claim, arguing that the complainant's income was not properly proven and challenging the basis for the compensation demanded (₹24,000 monthly income claimed for the deceased). One defendant's objection was rejected as no grounds were found. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In MVC No. 1745/2023, heard on 17.01.2026, the court continued the main hearing on a motor vehicle accident compensation claim. The petitioner's affidavit was admitted as evidence. The defendant's counsel contested the claim, arguing that the complainant's income was not properly proven and challenging the basis for the compensation demanded (₹24,000 monthly income claimed for the deceased). One defendant's objection was rejected as no grounds were found. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. 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, ALAND All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case