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.

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

CNR: KAKB510001162024

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

187/2024

Filing Date

08-02-2024

Registration No

204/2024

Registration Date

20-02-2024

Court

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHITAPUR

Judge

951-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, Chittapur

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

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

Adv. Sri, B.D.MAKA advocate

Respondent(s)

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

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

Hearing History

Judge: 951-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, Chittapur

06-03-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

12-02-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

23-01-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

22-01-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

23-12-2025

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Interim Orders

18-10-2025
Deposition
13-11-2025
Issue
21-11-2025
Deposition
23-01-2026
Deposition

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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHITAPUR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case