Nathuram S/o Manik Rathod, age.57 years, Occ. nil. vs Monikamala N.S S/o Prabhakar S.G — 758/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 166. Status: ARGUMENTS-CIVIL. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAKB410002322023
Next Hearing
09th April 2026
Filing Number
770/2023
Filing Date
06-06-2023
Registration No
758/2023
Registration Date
22-06-2023
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI
Judge
828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Nathuram S/o Manik Rathod, age.57 years, Occ. nil.
Adv. NEELKANTH H RATHOD
Sakkubai W/o Nathuram Rathod, age.49 years, Occ. household.
Respondent(s)
Monikamala N.S S/o Prabhakar S.G
Ramshetty S/o Bhimshetty, age.52 years, Occ. owner of the vehile.
TATA AIG General Insurance Co.Ltd Bangalore Through its Divisional office
Hearing History
Judge: 828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 27-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 20-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 06-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary In case MVC No. 758/2023 (dated 20-02-2026), the court heard arguments from both the respondent's counsel (Sri VRM) and the petitioner's counsel (Sri NHR) regarding an insurance claim dispute. The court rejected the petitioner's contentions that the vehicle was uninsured and that false evidence was presented, finding these arguments to be without merit. The court appears to have upheld the insurance policy validity and dismissed the petitioner's challenges to the investigation report and insurance coverage claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In case MVC No. 758/2023 (dated 20-02-2026), the court heard arguments from both the respondent's counsel (Sri VRM) and the petitioner's counsel (Sri NHR) regarding an insurance claim dispute. The court rejected the petitioner's contentions that the vehicle was uninsured and that false evidence was presented, finding these arguments to be without merit. The court appears to have upheld the insurance policy validity and dismissed the petitioner's challenges to the investigation report and insurance coverage claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts