Dini Samuel.S vs Ratheesh S.C Advocate - K.K Jose Kumar — 100550/2022
Case under Motor Vehicle Act \ Section 166,140. Disposed: Contested--AWARD PASSED on 27th April 2026.
OP (MV) - ORIGINAL PETITION (MOTOR VEHICLES)
CNR: KLKM120006682022
e-Filing Number
16-11-2022
Filing Number
101408/2022
Filing Date
18-11-2022
Registration No
100550/2022
Registration Date
18-11-2022
Court
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ,Punalur
Judge
1-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Punalur
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AWARD PASSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dini Samuel.S
Adv. Bijeesh S Pillai, Bijeesh S Pillai
Respondent(s)
Ratheesh S.C Advocate - K.K Jose Kumar
Dinesh V.R
Adv. K.K Jose Kumar
Magma H D I General Insurance Co.Ltd
Adv. Sreedharan Thampi
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Punalur
Disposed
Order/Judgement
FOR HEARING
Disposed
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-04-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 06-04-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 06-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 31-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: OP(MV) 550/2022 - Dini Samuel.S v. Ratheesh S.C & Others Decision: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹2,77,550 compensation to petitioner Dini Samuel.S, holding the 2nd respondent (driver) liable for rash and negligent driving of a pickup van that struck her stationary motorcycle, causing serious injuries. The 3rd respondent (insurance company) was directed to pay, despite claiming policy violation due to missing vehicle fitness certificate, as the registration remained valid on accident date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OP(MV) 550/2022 - Dini Samuel.S v. Ratheesh S.C & Others Decision: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹2,77,550 compensation to petitioner Dini Samuel.S, holding the 2nd respondent (driver) liable for rash and negligent driving of a pickup van that struck her stationary motorcycle, causing serious injuries. The 3rd respondent (insurance company) was directed to pay, despite claiming policy violation due to missing vehicle fitness certificate, as the registration remained valid on accident date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts