Tome Thomas vs Shiny Sebastian Advocate - Biby John — 100917/2020
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 140 & 166. Disposed: Contested--AWARD PASSED on 27th March 2026.
OP(MV) - ORIGINAL PETITION (MOTOR VEHICLES)
CNR: KLKT090010272020
Filing Number
1018/2020
Filing Date
13-07-2020
Registration No
100917/2020
Registration Date
15-07-2020
Court
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / Addl. District & Sessions Court /Rent Control Appellate Authority, Pala
Judge
1-M A C T / Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pala
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AWARD PASSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Tome Thomas
Adv. E.V.Mathew
Respondent(s)
Shiny Sebastian Advocate - Biby John
IFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co.Ltd
Adv. BENOY JOSE MATHEW
Hearing History
Judge: 1-M A C T / Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pala
Disposed
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 26-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 25-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 16-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 10-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Tome Thomas v. Shiny Sebastian & IFCO TOKIO General Insurance Decision: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹8,13,800 to Tome Thomas (OP 917/2020) and ₹76,000 to Rija Jose (OP 924/2020) for injuries sustained in a scooter-car collision on 15.01.2020. The tribunal found the car driver (Respondent 1) negligent based on FIR and charge sheet evidence, and held the insurance company (Respondent 2) liable to pay compensation with 9% interest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Tome Thomas v. Shiny Sebastian & IFCO TOKIO General Insurance Decision: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹8,13,800 to Tome Thomas (OP 917/2020) and ₹76,000 to Rija Jose (OP 924/2020) for injuries sustained in a scooter-car collision on 15.01.2020. The tribunal found the car driver (Respondent 1) negligent based on FIR and charge sheet evidence, and held the insurance company (Respondent 2) liable to pay compensation with 9% interest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts