Shekabba N.P vs Subramani Advocate - Mohan Kumar M E — 75/2022
Case under Motor Vehicle Act 1989 Section 166. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 04th April 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAKD010005412022
Next Hearing
04th April 2026
Filing Number
75/2022
Filing Date
22-06-2022
Registration No
75/2022
Registration Date
24-06-2022
Court
PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI
Judge
997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shekabba N.P
Adv. Jayachandra M S
Dulaikha
Respondent(s)
Subramani Advocate - Mohan Kumar M E
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Adv. Ganapathi P T
Rafeek
Adv. Aboobacker T. H
Shakeel Sayeed
Adv. Sharath M. K.
Hearing History
Judge: 997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS Civil
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 11-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 29-01-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 09-01-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 26-12-2025 | ARGUMENTS Civil |
Interim Orders
This is a Kannada language court order from A.A.S.T. (Appellate Authority for Section 12) in Belgaum-Belagavi. Case No. 75/2022 involves witness PW-1 (70-year-old male from Belagavi) testifying in what appears to be a motor vehicle accident case dated 23-09-2024. The witness provided detailed testimony regarding a vehicle accident involving his son, claiming lack of responsibility. The court found the evidence of Exhibits 1-3 admissible, while Exhibit 4 was rejected due to the witness's non-appearance. The case was ultimately dismissed with no further appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a Kannada language court order from A.A.S.T. (Appellate Authority for Section 12) in Belgaum-Belagavi. Case No. 75/2022 involves witness PW-1 (70-year-old male from Belagavi) testifying in what appears to be a motor vehicle accident case dated 23-09-2024. The witness provided detailed testimony regarding a vehicle accident involving his son, claiming lack of responsibility. The court found the evidence of Exhibits 1-3 admissible, while Exhibit 4 was rejected due to the witness's non-appearance. The case was ultimately dismissed with no further appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts