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.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAVN310021082024
Next Hearing
29th May 2026
e-Filing Number
21-12-2024
Filing Number
1069/2024
Filing Date
23-12-2024
Registration No
1069/2024
Registration Date
23-12-2024
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI
Judge
1213-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt Nirmalamma
Adv. I Chidananda
Respondent(s)
Prakash Naik D S/o Dakya Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 1213-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
EVIDENCE-C
EVIDENCE-C
WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C
EVIDENCE-C
EVIDENCE-C
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE-C |
| 17-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-C |
| 05-12-2025 | WRITTEN STATEMENTS/OBJECTION TO MAIN PETITION-C |
| 14-11-2025 | EVIDENCE-C |
| 03-10-2025 | EVIDENCE-C |
Interim Orders
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts