Sandeep S/o Harishchandra Age-19yrs Occ-Labour Now nil R/o Malgatti vs Ennem Vasudeva Reddy S/o Ennem Pedda Venkat Reddy Age-Majoor Occ-Owner of Lorry R/o Anjeneya Swamy — 204/2024

Case under Under Section 166 of M.v. Act 1988 Section 166. Status: Arguments-CIVIL. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

Arguments-CIVIL Next hearing 27-Mar-2026 this date has passed

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

CNR: KAKB510001162024

Filing Number

187/2024

Filing Date

08-Feb-2024

Registration No

204/2024

Registration Date

20-Feb-2024

Court

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHITAPUR

Judge

951-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

Last updated 13-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Section 166 of M.v. Act 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sandeep S/o Harishchandra Age-19yrs Occ-Labour Now nil R/o Malgatti

    Adv. Sri, B.D.MAKA advocate

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ennem Vasudeva Reddy S/o Ennem Pedda Venkat Reddy Age-Majoor Occ-Owner of Lorry R/o Anjeneya Swamy

  2. 2.Through its Manager Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd Deshpande Nagar.

Case History

  1. 27-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Arguments-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  3. 12-Feb-2026

    Arguments-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  4. 23-Jan-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Case Summary Case No: MVC 204/2024 | Date: 23-01-2026 The court examined a motor vehicle accident case involving a truck collision. The witness testified that the truck had valid insurance, fitness, and permit at the time of the accident. The opposing counsel argued the witness testimony was false and that the final investigation report found no fault with the bike driver. The court found contradictions in the witness's statements regarding vehicle documentation and fault determination, noting issues with the credibility of the affidavit evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 23-Jan-2026

    Arguments-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  6. 22-Jan-2026

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  7. 23-Dec-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  8. 21-Nov-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  9. 21-Nov-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  10. 13-Nov-2025

    IssueView PDF

  11. 13-Nov-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  12. 18-Oct-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  13. 18-Oct-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  14. 06-Oct-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  15. 14-Aug-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  16. 19-Jun-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  17. 15-May-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  18. 14-Mar-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  19. 13-Mar-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  20. 15-Feb-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  21. 16-Jan-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  22. 20-Dec-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  23. 23-Nov-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  24. 05-Nov-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  25. 09-Sep-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  26. 26-Jul-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  27. 14-Jun-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  28. 26-Apr-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  29. 23-Feb-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 08-Feb-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 204/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No: MVC 204/2024 | Date: 23-01-2026 The court examined a motor vehicle accident case involving a truck collision. The witness testified that the truck had valid insurance, fitness, and permit at the time of the accident. The opposing counsel argued the witness testimony was false and that the final investigation report found no fault with the bike driver. The court found contradictions in the witness's statements regarding vehicle documentation and fault determination, noting issues with the credibility of the affidavit evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case