KAVITHA vs MANJULA — 615/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S166. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED OUTSIDE THE COURT on 01st April 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAMS080008612025
Filing Number
615/2025
Filing Date
27-Feb-2025
Registration No
615/2025
Registration Date
03-Mar-2025
Court
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU
Judge
434-Judge Court Of Small Causes
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--SETTLED OUTSIDE THE COURT
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KAVITHA
-
2.SATHISHA B.C.
Respondent(s)
-
1.MANJULA
-
2.GANESHA NAYAKA P R
-
3.THE MANAGER, SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
OrdersView PDF
The court accepted the joint compromise memo filed by petitioners Kavitha and Sathisha B.C. and respondents Manjula, Ganesha Nayaka P.R., and Sriram General Insurance Company Limited, settling the case for ₹6,00,000. Each petitioner receives ₹3,00,000 in equal apportionment, with Respondent No.2 directed to deposit the amount without delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-Apr-2026
Disposed
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
24-Mar-2026
Settlement
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
14-Mar-2026
A.D.R.
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
18-Feb-2026
A.D.R.
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
06-Jan-2026
Objections
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
14-Nov-2025
Objections
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
11-Sep-2025
Notice
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
14-Jul-2025
Notice
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
21-May-2025
Notice
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
20-May-2025
Notice
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
05-Mar-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Feb-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 615/2025
The court accepted the joint compromise memo filed by petitioners Kavitha and Sathisha B.C. and respondents Manjula, Ganesha Nayaka P.R., and Sriram General Insurance Company Limited, settling the case for ₹6,00,000. Each petitioner receives ₹3,00,000 in equal apportionment, with Respondent No.2 directed to deposit the amount without delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts