DR.RACHANA D vs UDAY SHANKAR M.G — 1711/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S 166. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 03rd July 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAMS080019202025
Filing Number
1711/2025
Filing Date
16-Jun-2025
Registration No
1711/2025
Registration Date
16-Jun-2025
Court
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU
Judge
434-Judge Court Of Small Causes
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DR.RACHANA D
Adv. Vinayaka
Respondent(s)
-
1.UDAY SHANKAR M.G
-
2.BHOOMIKA M U
-
3.TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
Case History
-
03-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
07-May-2026
Evidence
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
14-Mar-2026
A.D.R.
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
04-Mar-2026
Restored
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
04-Mar-2026
Orders
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
04-Mar-2026
A.D.R.
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
03-Mar-2026
OrdersView PDF
Case Summary - MVC 1711/25 The petition filed by Dr. Rachana D against Uday Shankar M.G, Bhoomika M U, and Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd has been dismissed for non-prosecution. The petitioner and her counsel failed to appear before the tribunal despite repeated calling and specific directions, and no steps were taken despite sufficient prior opportunities granted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
06-Feb-2026
Appearance Of Party
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
09-Dec-2025
Objections
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
23-Oct-2025
Objections
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
20-Aug-2025
Objections
Judge Court Of Small Causes
-
25-Jun-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Jun-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1711/2025
Case Summary - MVC 1711/25 The petition filed by Dr. Rachana D against Uday Shankar M.G, Bhoomika M U, and Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd has been dismissed for non-prosecution. The petitioner and her counsel failed to appear before the tribunal despite repeated calling and specific directions, and no steps were taken despite sufficient prior opportunities granted by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts