Manjula W/o. Prabhakar Gouda vs Manjunath Goydu Gouda — 157/2025

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/s.166. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED IN PART on 06th March 2026.

M.V.C. - ACCIDENT CLAIM CASES U/R MOTOR

CNR: KAUK610002102025

Case disposed

Filing Number

48/2025

Filing Date

17-04-2025

Registration No

157/2025

Registration Date

17-04-2025

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HONAVAR

Judge

526-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC HONAVARA

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED IN PART

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section U/s.166

Petitioner(s)

Manjula W/o. Prabhakar Gouda

Adv. ANANTH R NAIK

Anikita D/o Prabhakar Gouda

Adv. ANANTH R NAIK

Respondent(s)

Manjunath Goydu Gouda

The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd

Satish Gajanan Karki

The Manager, Chola M. S. General Insurance Company Ltd.

Hearing History

Judge: 526-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC HONAVARA

06-03-2026

Disposed

03-03-2026

JUDGMENTS

26-02-2026

JUDGMENTS

17-02-2026

JUDGMENTS

03-02-2026

JUDGMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026

Judgment

Interim Orders

20-01-2026
Deposition
20-01-2026
Issue
03-02-2026
Deposition

The court in MVC No. 157/2025 admitted witness testimony dated 03-02-2026 and rejected the petitioner's challenge to dismiss the application. The court found that the respondent's vehicle driver was responsible for the accident and accepted the documentary evidence (Session Letter marked as NR-2 and Insurance Policy as NR-3) while dismissing arguments that the witness testimony was false. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court in MVC No. 157/2025 admitted witness testimony dated 03-02-2026 and rejected the petitioner's challenge to dismiss the application. The court found that the respondent's vehicle driver was responsible for the accident and accepted the documentary evidence (Session Letter marked as NR-2 and Insurance Policy as NR-3) while dismissing arguments that the witness testimony was false. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HONAVAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case