Pradeep S/o Vithalrao Mustapur Age 30 yrs Occ Agri and Milk Seller R/o Gadilingadalli Tq Chincholi vs Arjun S/o Saibanna Age 40 yrs Occ owner of the Ape Auto R/o Ainapur Tq chincholi Dist Kalaburagi — 1421/2024

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 166. Status: Hearing.. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.

Hearing. Next hearing 17-Apr-2026 this date has passed

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

CNR: KAKB410003802024

e-Filing Number

28-08-2024

Filing Number

1276/2024

Filing Date

29-Aug-2024

Registration No

1421/2024

Registration Date

23-Oct-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI

Judge

828-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

Last updated 13-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Pradeep S/o Vithalrao Mustapur Age 30 yrs Occ Agri and Milk Seller R/o Gadilingadalli Tq Chincholi

    Adv. NEELKANTES HEMASINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Arjun S/o Saibanna Age 40 yrs Occ owner of the Ape Auto R/o Ainapur Tq chincholi Dist Kalaburagi

  2. 2.The manager HDFC ERGO General insurance company limited 2nd Floor 101/A/SF/2 Kishan krupa

Case History

  1. 17-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Case Summary Case No.: M.V.C. 1421/2024 (Petition for Compensation) Court Order (dated 06-03-2026): The petition is remitted for further inquiry. The court found significant discrepancies in the petitioner's claims regarding an alleged motor vehicle accident on 07-03-2024. While medical records (MLC and hospital documents) indicate injury treatment, the court noted inconsistencies in the nature and extent of injuries claimed versus documented evidence. The petitioner failed to produce adequate supporting documents for medical expenses (₹6-5 lakhs claimed) and employment impact despite holding an MSc Chemistry degree. The court also questioned the delay in filing and inconsistencies in the accident details. Further investigation is required before compensation can be determined. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Hearing.

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  4. 20-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  5. 21-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  6. 19-Nov-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  7. 19-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  8. 29-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  9. 03-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  10. 28-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  11. 27-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  12. 24-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  13. 21-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  14. 28-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  15. 14-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  16. 31-Jan-2025

    IssueView PDF

  17. 31-Jan-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  18. 17-Jan-2025

    Issues.

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  19. 30-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  20. 27-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  21. 13-Dec-2024

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  22. 22-Nov-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC,Chincholi

  23. 06-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  24. 29-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1421/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No.: M.V.C. 1421/2024 (Petition for Compensation) Court Order (dated 06-03-2026): The petition is remitted for further inquiry. The court found significant discrepancies in the petitioner's claims regarding an alleged motor vehicle accident on 07-03-2024. While medical records (MLC and hospital documents) indicate injury treatment, the court noted inconsistencies in the nature and extent of injuries claimed versus documented evidence. The petitioner failed to produce adequate supporting documents for medical expenses (₹6-5 lakhs claimed) and employment impact despite holding an MSc Chemistry degree. The court also questioned the delay in filing and inconsistencies in the accident details. Further investigation is required before compensation can be determined. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case