Sherin Jose vs Jomy George Advocate - Ajith L A — 100516/2023

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166(1) 140. Status: Further evidence. Next hearing: 20th April 2026.

OP(MV) - ORIGINAL PETITION (MOTOR VEHICLES)

CNR: KLER490005312023

Further evidence

Next Hearing

20th April 2026

e-Filing Number

24-05-2023

Filing Number

100531/2023

Filing Date

25-05-2023

Registration No

100516/2023

Registration Date

25-05-2023

Court

MACT, Muvattupuzha

Judge

1-MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

Acts & Sections

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Section 166(1) 140
IA/1/2026 Classification : Application Seeking Adjournment Section Sherin JoseJomy George
IA/2/2026 Classification : Adjournment Application Section Sherin JoseJomy George

Petitioner(s)

Sherin Jose

Adv. GEORGE KURIAN

Respondent(s)

Jomy George Advocate - Ajith L A

Manager Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Company Ltd

Adv. Saji Joseph,SAJI SAJI SYED MOHAMMEDALI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

01-04-2026

Further evidence

27-03-2026

Defendant/Respondent Evidence

24-03-2026

For evidence

17-03-2026

Adjourned

09-03-2026

For evidence

Interim Orders

04-11-2024
Order
04-11-2024
Award

Summary: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha dismissed the Original Petition (OP) filed by Sherin Jose against Jomy George, Biju, and IFFCO TOKYO General Insurance Co. Ltd on 4th November 2024. The petitioner failed to appear before the court, provided no legal representation, and produced no documentary evidence, indicating lack of interest in pursuing the case. Consequently, the tribunal declared the petitioner absent and dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha dismissed the Original Petition (OP) filed by Sherin Jose against Jomy George, Biju, and IFFCO TOKYO General Insurance Co. Ltd on 4th November 2024. The petitioner failed to appear before the court, provided no legal representation, and produced no documentary evidence, indicating lack of interest in pursuing the case. Consequently, the tribunal declared the petitioner absent and dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

MACT, Muvattupuzha All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case