Gunja W/o Late. Hemant Kumar, Age.22 years, Occ. Household. vs M/s Govardhan Reddy Ranjole S/o R.Govardhan Reddy. Age.major, Occ. Owner of Bulero — 385/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAKB410000982025
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
Filing Number
359/2025
Filing Date
19-02-2025
Registration No
385/2025
Registration Date
04-03-2025
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI
Judge
828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Gunja W/o Late. Hemant Kumar, Age.22 years, Occ. Household.
Adv. B.V.PATIL
Rajmati Devi W/o Gopali Age.65 years, Occ. Household.
Gopali S/o jiut age. 71 years, Occ. Nil.
Kumari Sunil Prasad D/o Gopali Prasad Age 23 years, Occ. Household.
Respondent(s)
M/s Govardhan Reddy Ranjole S/o R.Govardhan Reddy. Age.major, Occ. Owner of Bulero
The Zuno General Insurance Ltd. Through the General Manager, zuno General Insuance Ltd.
Hearing History
Judge: 828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
ISSUES.
ISSUES.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 06-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 23-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 09-01-2026 | ISSUES. |
| 19-11-2025 | ISSUES. |
Interim Orders
The case (MVC 385/2025) involves a motor vehicle accident claim. The court heard testimony from the petitioner on 06-02-2026 and examined multiple documents including the FIR, final police report, medical examination report, and case diary. The petitioner's counsel raised several substantive challenges regarding inconsistencies in the accident details and compensation claim, arguing that false information was submitted. The case was adjourned for further hearing with directions for continued examination of evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The case (MVC 385/2025) involves a motor vehicle accident claim. The court heard testimony from the petitioner on 06-02-2026 and examined multiple documents including the FIR, final police report, medical examination report, and case diary. The petitioner's counsel raised several substantive challenges regarding inconsistencies in the accident details and compensation claim, arguing that false information was submitted. The case was adjourned for further hearing with directions for continued examination of evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts