Shaik Mohammed S/o Masood Ahmed Age-33yrs Occ-Agriculture and Business now nil vs Santosh S/o Gemu Chavan Age-35yrs Owner of Motor ycle bearing No. KA-32 EY- — 563/2024

Case under Under Section 166 of M.v. Act 1988 Section 166. Status: Objection. Next hearing: 06th May 2026.

Objection Next hearing 06-May-2026 this date has passed

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

CNR: KAKB510002312024

Filing Number

568/2024

Filing Date

20-Apr-2024

Registration No

563/2024

Registration Date

15-May-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.Shaik Mohammed S/o Masood Ahmed Age-33yrs Occ-Agriculture and Business now nil

    Adv. Sri, Vishwanath Reddy Malipatil

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Santosh S/o Gemu Chavan Age-35yrs Owner of Motor ycle bearing No. KA-32 EY-

  2. 2.Through The Manger IFFCO-GEN INSU CO LTD 1-101/A/TF-2,3rd Floor Kishan Krupa above

Case History

  1. 06-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  4. 20-Feb-2026

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  5. 30-Jan-2026

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  6. 26-Dec-2025

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  7. 21-Nov-2025

    Objection

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  8. 15-Nov-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  9. 07-Nov-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  10. 25-Sep-2025

    DepositionView PDF

    Court Order Summary Case: MVC No. 563/2024 | Date: 25-09-2025 | Court: Senior Civil Judge, Chittapur Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the claimant failed to prove the defendant vehicle's liability in the accident of 20-02-2024. The court rejected the claimant's claims regarding medical expenses (₹3,50,000), future treatment costs (₹2,50,000), and monthly income (₹25,000), as the claimant could not substantiate these with adequate evidence. No compensation is awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  11. 25-Sep-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  12. 18-Jul-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  13. 26-Jun-2025

    Issues.

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  14. 06-Jun-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  15. 19-Apr-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  16. 20-Mar-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  17. 15-Feb-2025

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  18. 27-Dec-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  19. 29-Nov-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  20. 25-Oct-2024

    Evidence-CIVIL

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  21. 21-Sep-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  22. 17-Aug-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  23. 16-Aug-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  24. 15-Jul-2024

    Summons

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC, Chittapur

  25. 21-May-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  26. 20-Apr-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 563/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: MVC No. 563/2024 | Date: 25-09-2025 | Court: Senior Civil Judge, Chittapur Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the claimant failed to prove the defendant vehicle's liability in the accident of 20-02-2024. The court rejected the claimant's claims regarding medical expenses (₹3,50,000), future treatment costs (₹2,50,000), and monthly income (₹25,000), as the claimant could not substantiate these with adequate evidence. No compensation is awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case