Smt Nirmalamma vs Prakash Naik D S/o Dakya Naik — 1069/2024

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166. Status: Evidence-C. Next hearing: 29th May 2026.

Evidence-C Next hearing 29-May-2026 this date has passed

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

CNR: KAVN310021082024

e-Filing Number

21-12-2024

Filing Number

1069/2024

Filing Date

23-Dec-2024

Registration No

1069/2024

Registration Date

23-Dec-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI

Judge

1213-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

Last updated 13-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Smt Nirmalamma

    Adv. I Chidananda

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Prakash Naik D S/o Dakya Naik

Case History

  1. 29-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  3. 17-Jan-2026

    Evidence-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  4. 05-Dec-2025

    Written Statements/Objection To Main Petition-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  5. 14-Nov-2025

    Evidence-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  6. 03-Oct-2025

    OrdersView PDF

    Summary: The court allowed the petitioners' application (IA No.1) to condone a delay of 697 days in filing a motor vehicle compensation petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner sought compensation for her husband's death in an accident, citing mental shock, health problems, and difficulty in securing documents as reasons for the delay. The court rejected the insurance company's argument that the petition was barred by the 6-month limitation period under the Motor Vehicles Act, holding that the MV Act being beneficial legislation should not be defeated on technical grounds. The case is posted for evidence on 14.11.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  7. 03-Oct-2025

    Evidence-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  8. 12-Sep-2025

    First Hearing/Maintainability-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  9. 01-Aug-2025

    First Hearing/Maintainability-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  10. 20-Jun-2025

    First Hearing/Maintainability-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  11. 11-Apr-2025

    First Hearing/Maintainability-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  12. 14-Mar-2025

    First Hearing/Maintainability-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  13. 14-Feb-2025

    For Objection/Counter To Main Petition(cr)

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  14. 04-Jan-2025

    Appearance Of Parties/Advocates-C

    Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hagaribommanahalli Vijayanagara District

  15. 27-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  16. 23-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1069/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed the petitioners' application (IA No.1) to condone a delay of 697 days in filing a motor vehicle compensation petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner sought compensation for her husband's death in an accident, citing mental shock, health problems, and difficulty in securing documents as reasons for the delay. The court rejected the insurance company's argument that the petition was barred by the 6-month limitation period under the Motor Vehicles Act, holding that the MV Act being beneficial legislation should not be defeated on technical grounds. The case is posted for evidence on 14.11.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case