SUSANA V vs AZEEM PASHA — 1025/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S166. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: KAMS080012552025

e-Filing Number

08-04-2025

Filing Number

1025/2025

Filing Date

08-Apr-2025

Registration No

1025/2025

Registration Date

09-Apr-2025

Court

JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU

Judge

434-Judge Court Of Small Causes

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUSANA V

    Adv. BASAVARAJU N

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AZEEM PASHA

  2. 2.THE MANAGER, GO DIGIT GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Orders

    The MACT Court at Mysuru dismissed petition MVC 1025/2025 for non-appearance of the petitioner despite specific directions and non-prosecution. The court found that the petitioner had never appeared since filing, sufficient opportunities were granted, and the petitioner showed no interest in contesting the matter, warranting dismissal under CPC Orders 9 and 17. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  4. 23-Jan-2026

    Objections

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  5. 28-Nov-2025

    Objections

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  6. 17-Oct-2025

    Objections

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  7. 19-Aug-2025

    Objections

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  8. 30-Jun-2025

    Notice

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  9. 24-Apr-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 08-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1025/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The MACT Court at Mysuru dismissed petition MVC 1025/2025 for non-appearance of the petitioner despite specific directions and non-prosecution. The court found that the petitioner had never appeared since filing, sufficient opportunities were granted, and the petitioner showed no interest in contesting the matter, warranting dismissal under CPC Orders 9 and 17. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case