Babi vs Sharath Kumar Shetty — 444/2023

Case under Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Section 166. 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: KAUP310004342023

Filing Number

444/2023

Filing Date

25-May-2023

Registration No

444/2023

Registration Date

15-Jun-2023

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,KUNDAPURA

Judge

515-Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Babi

    Adv. Shashidhara Hegde

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sharath Kumar Shetty

  2. 2.The Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,Bengaluru

Case History

  1. 06-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  3. 21-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  4. 23-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  5. 08-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  6. 12-Nov-2025

    DepositionView PDF

    Summary This is a Motor Vehicles Act compensation case (MVC 444/2023) heard on 12-11-2025. The court examined the petitioner's testimony regarding injuries sustained in a motor accident, including a left leg fracture with three broken bones, skin grafting, and partial disability. The court found discrepancies in the petitioner's claims regarding the extent of disability and income loss, noting contradictions between the medical evidence presented and the petitioner's statements. The petition is dismissed as the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for the claimed compensation of Rs. 30,000 and was unable to provide adequate documentary evidence supporting the loss of income and disability claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  7. 12-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  8. 25-Sep-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  9. 25-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  10. 20-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  11. 06-Aug-2025

    IssueView PDF

  12. 06-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  13. 12-Jul-2025

    Compliance

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  14. 27-Jun-2025

    Call Before Lok Adalat

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  15. 11-Jun-2025

    Compliance

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  16. 15-May-2025

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  17. 15-Feb-2025

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  18. 12-Dec-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  19. 11-Dec-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  20. 28-Nov-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  21. 30-Oct-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  22. 19-Sep-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  23. 09-Aug-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  24. 04-Jul-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  25. 17-May-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  26. 16-Mar-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  27. 09-Mar-2024

    Call Before Lok Adalat

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  28. 23-Feb-2024

    Call Before Lok Adalat

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  29. 11-Jan-2024

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  30. 09-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  31. 04-Dec-2023

    A.D.R.

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  32. 18-Oct-2023

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  33. 15-Sep-2023

    Written Statement

    Senior CIVIL Judge,kundapura

  34. 23-Jun-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  35. 25-May-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 444/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a Motor Vehicles Act compensation case (MVC 444/2023) heard on 12-11-2025. The court examined the petitioner's testimony regarding injuries sustained in a motor accident, including a left leg fracture with three broken bones, skin grafting, and partial disability. The court found discrepancies in the petitioner's claims regarding the extent of disability and income loss, noting contradictions between the medical evidence presented and the petitioner's statements. The petition is dismissed as the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for the claimed compensation of Rs. 30,000 and was unable to provide adequate documentary evidence supporting the loss of income and disability claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case