Lathif vs S. Suresh Shetty — 122/2023
Case under Motor Vehicle Act 1989 Section 166. Status: ARGUMENTS Civil. Next hearing: 13th March 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAKD010012732023
Next Hearing
13th March 2026
Filing Number
122/2023
Filing Date
03-11-2023
Registration No
122/2023
Registration Date
04-11-2023
Court
PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI
Judge
997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Lathif
Adv. Dominik N. D.
Respondent(s)
S. Suresh Shetty
Shephali Shetty
Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Mangalore
V Abusali
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi
Hearing History
Judge: 997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
ARGUMENTS Civil
ARGUMENTS Civil
ARGUMENTS Civil
EVIDENCE - Civil
EVIDENCE - Civil
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS Civil |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS Civil |
| 20-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS Civil |
| 06-02-2026 | EVIDENCE - Civil |
| 20-01-2026 | EVIDENCE - Civil |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Court: 1st Additional District and MMCT Court, Madikeri-Kodagu Case No.: MVC 122/2023 Outcome: The court examined RW-1 (Respondent Witness-1) on 20-02-2026, who filed an affidavit as chief examination. The witness confirmed vehicle repair costs of Rs. 2,41,220 as per IRDI Motor Survey Report (marked as NR-1) and Insurance Policy (marked as NR-2). The court found that insurance compensation has already been disbursed to the petitioner along with conditions, and no further cross-examination was required. The matter proceeded with evidence recorded and documented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Court: 1st Additional District and MMCT Court, Madikeri-Kodagu Case No.: MVC 122/2023 Outcome: The court examined RW-1 (Respondent Witness-1) on 20-02-2026, who filed an affidavit as chief examination. The witness confirmed vehicle repair costs of Rs. 2,41,220 as per IRDI Motor Survey Report (marked as NR-1) and Insurance Policy (marked as NR-2). The court found that insurance compensation has already been disbursed to the petitioner along with conditions, and no further cross-examination was required. The matter proceeded with evidence recorded and documented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts