Ayyappa S/o Yankappa, Age 30 Yrs, Occ Labour (Now Nil) vs Pareekshiph Naik S/o Eshwarappa S.K, Age 40 Yrs, Occ Owner of the vehicle — 104/2024
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section Us,166,of,IMV,Act. Status: EVIDENCE-CIVIL. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
M.V.C. - Accident Claim Cases u/r M.V.
CNR: KAYG020008562024
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
Filing Number
104/2024
Filing Date
19-03-2024
Registration No
104/2024
Registration Date
20-03-2024
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, YADGIR
Judge
333-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, Yadgir
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ayyappa S/o Yankappa, Age 30 Yrs, Occ Labour (Now Nil)
Adv. SANTOSH BADAMI ESHWARAYYA
Respondent(s)
Pareekshiph Naik S/o Eshwarappa S.K, Age 40 Yrs, Occ Owner of the vehicle
The Reliance General Insurance Company Limitted
Hearing History
Judge: 333-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, Yadgir
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
A.D.R.-CIVL
A.D.R.-CIVL
A.D.R.-CIVL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-05-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 15-04-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 13-03-2026 | A.D.R.-CIVL |
| 06-03-2026 | A.D.R.-CIVL |
| 13-02-2026 | A.D.R.-CIVL |
Interim Orders
In Motor Vehicle Case No. 104/2024 dated 06-03-2026, the court heard oral evidence from the petitioner Ayyappa in a claim against vehicle owner Pareekshiph Naik and Reliance General Insurance Company. Seven documentary exhibits including the police report, FIR, final report, accident spot panchnama, vehicle details, injury certificate, and witness statement were admitted into evidence after the petitioner affirmed their accuracy. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
In Motor Vehicle Case No. 104/2024 dated 06-03-2026, the court heard oral evidence from the petitioner Ayyappa in a claim against vehicle owner Pareekshiph Naik and Reliance General Insurance Company. Seven documentary exhibits including the police report, FIR, final report, accident spot panchnama, vehicle details, injury certificate, and witness statement were admitted into evidence after the petitioner affirmed their accuracy. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts