Mamathajbee W/o Imamasab Pulachadi Age-45yrs Occ-Agriculture now nil, vs Mahmad Asif Patel S/o Kasimsab Age-38yrs Occ-Owner of Car bearing NO. KA-33 M-4568, — 1306/2024

Case under Under Section 166 of M.v. Act 1988 Section 166. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

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

CNR: KAKB510004972024

JUDGEMENT

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1349/2024

Filing Date

12-09-2024

Registration No

1306/2024

Registration Date

24-09-2024

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)

Mamathajbee W/o Imamasab Pulachadi Age-45yrs Occ-Agriculture now nil,

Adv. Sri, Vishwanath Reddy Malipatil.

Respondent(s)

Mahmad Asif Patel S/o Kasimsab Age-38yrs Occ-Owner of Car bearing NO. KA-33 M-4568,

Through The Manager Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Hearing History

Judge: 951-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, Chittapur

12-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

07-03-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

12-02-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

23-01-2026

ARGUMENTS-CIVIL

23-12-2025

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Interim Orders

07-05-2025
Issue
23-12-2025
Deposition
23-01-2026
Deposition

Case Summary Case No.: MVC 1306/2024 Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the insurance company cannot be held liable for compensation as the accident was caused by the defendant vehicle (KA-33-M-4658) hitting the petitioner's vehicle from behind, and the defendant driver admitted his fault in the criminal case. The insurance company argued they are not responsible for the compensation claim. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No.: MVC 1306/2024 Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the insurance company cannot be held liable for compensation as the accident was caused by the defendant vehicle (KA-33-M-4658) hitting the petitioner's vehicle from behind, and the defendant driver admitted his fault in the criminal case. The insurance company argued they are not responsible for the compensation claim. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

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

Explore other courts

Search Another Case