Kaushik V. Poojary vs Macha jayaram Advocate - Dinesh C Nayak — 517/2024

Case under Indian Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Section U/s166. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 06th April 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 06-Apr-2026 this date has passed

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

CNR: KAUP020030652024

Filing Number

517/2024

Filing Date

24-May-2024

Registration No

517/2024

Registration Date

02-Jul-2024

Court

PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, UDUPI

Judge

602-I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Section U/s166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kaushik V. Poojary

    Adv. SANKAPPA A.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Macha jayaram Advocate - Dinesh C Nayak

  2. 2.The Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,Udupi.

    Adv. DINESH B.SHETTY

Case History

  1. 06-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  3. 26-Feb-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Summary: In MVC 517/2024, the court examined evidence regarding medical treatment provided to the petitioner, including case records, X-rays, and treatment certificates dated 26-02-2026. The court found that the petitioner's treatment has been completed, with fractures properly healed and no disability resulting from the treatment. The court concluded that removal of an implant is not medically necessary and is at the petitioner's discretion, and dismissed the petition accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  5. 02-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  6. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  7. 10-Dec-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  8. 10-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  9. 25-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  10. 25-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  11. 13-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  12. 08-Sep-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  13. 08-Sep-2025

    A.D.R.

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  14. 14-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  15. 13-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  16. 03-Jun-2025

    Issues

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  17. 02-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  18. 01-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  19. 13-Feb-2025

    IssueView PDF

  20. 13-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  21. 15-Jan-2025

    Issues

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  22. 17-Dec-2024

    Written Statement

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  23. 24-Oct-2024

    Written Statement

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  24. 12-Sep-2024

    Written Statement

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  25. 03-Aug-2024

    Written Statement

    I Addl Sr Civil Judge and Acjm Udupi

  26. 08-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 24-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 517/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In MVC 517/2024, the court examined evidence regarding medical treatment provided to the petitioner, including case records, X-rays, and treatment certificates dated 26-02-2026. The court found that the petitioner's treatment has been completed, with fractures properly healed and no disability resulting from the treatment. The court concluded that removal of an implant is not medically necessary and is at the petitioner's discretion, and dismissed the petition accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case