NATARAJU.H.D vs SHASHIKUMAR Advocate - M.S.RAJESH — 128/2023
Case under Motor Vehicle Act 1989 Section U/S 166. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAMS080002062023
Next Hearing
17th June 2026
Filing Number
108/2023
Filing Date
17-01-2023
Registration No
128/2023
Registration Date
17-01-2023
Court
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU
Judge
434-JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NATARAJU.H.D
Adv. ARJUN GOWDA.T.M
Respondent(s)
SHASHIKUMAR Advocate - M.S.RAJESH
THE MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Hearing History
Judge: 434-JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
A.D.R.
A.D.R.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-05-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 25-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 04-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 14-03-2026 | A.D.R. |
| 10-03-2026 | A.D.R. |
Interim Orders
CASE SUMMARY: MVC No. 128/2023 This is a motor vehicle compensation case where petitioner Nataraju H.D. was cross-examined on 19.11.2025 regarding a motorcycle accident from 27.08.2021. The petitioner, who sustained right leg injuries, testified that he was riding as a passenger when the accident occurred near K.R. Nagar. He denied respondent counsel's suggestions that the rider lacked valid licensing, the vehicle was uninsured, or that rider negligence (due to rain) caused the accident. Petitioner also refuted allegations that medical bills were fabricated, that he suffered no disability, or that he currently earns more than pre-accident income. The cross-examination covered liability against Cholamandalam General Insurance Co. Ltd. and allegations of false FIS filing and forged documents. No re-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: MVC No. 128/2023 This is a motor vehicle compensation case where petitioner Nataraju H.D. was cross-examined on 19.11.2025 regarding a motorcycle accident from 27.08.2021. The petitioner, who sustained right leg injuries, testified that he was riding as a passenger when the accident occurred near K.R. Nagar. He denied respondent counsel's suggestions that the rider lacked valid licensing, the vehicle was uninsured, or that rider negligence (due to rain) caused the accident. Petitioner also refuted allegations that medical bills were fabricated, that he suffered no disability, or that he currently earns more than pre-accident income. The cross-examination covered liability against Cholamandalam General Insurance Co. Ltd. and allegations of false FIS filing and forged documents. No re-examination was conducted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts