SURAJ vs HANGOVAN — 2547/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S166. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: KAMS080027622025

Filing Number

2547/2025

Filing Date

17-Sep-2025

Registration No

2547/2025

Registration Date

18-Sep-2025

Court

JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU

Judge

434-Judge Court Of Small Causes

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section U/S166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURAJ

    Adv. V.B.GIRISH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HANGOVAN

  2. 2.THE DIVISIONAL BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrdersView PDF

    Case 2547/2025 Summary: The Lok Adalath accepted a settlement between petitioner Suraj and respondents Hangovan and United India Insurance Company Ltd. for ₹12,80,055. The court approved the compromise after confirming the petitioner's voluntary consent and competency, and directed the insurance company to deposit the full amount without unreasonable delay, noting the petitioner's substantial medical expenses and injury severity justified releasing the entire compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Notice

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  5. 30-Jan-2026

    Notice

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  6. 29-Nov-2025

    Notice

    Judge Court Of Small Causes

  7. 20-Sep-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 17-Sep-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2547/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case 2547/2025 Summary: The Lok Adalath accepted a settlement between petitioner Suraj and respondents Hangovan and United India Insurance Company Ltd. for ₹12,80,055. The court approved the compromise after confirming the petitioner's voluntary consent and competency, and directed the insurance company to deposit the full amount without unreasonable delay, noting the petitioner's substantial medical expenses and injury severity justified releasing the entire compensation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case