Thankamoni@ Suresh Babu Thankamaniyan vs M.R. Vinod — 100262/2016
Case under Madras Public Property Malversation Act 1837\ Section 166. Disposed: Contested--AWARD PASSED on 27th March 2026.
OP (MV) - ORIGINAL PETITION (MOTOR VEHICLES)
CNR: KLTV220002732016
Filing Number
267/2016
Filing Date
11-03-2016
Registration No
100262/2016
Registration Date
11-03-2016
Court
MACT , Neyyattinkara
Judge
1-MACT Neyyattinkara
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AWARD PASSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Thankamoni@ Suresh Babu Thankamaniyan
Adv. Sri S. Bhanukrishna Kumar
Respondent(s)
M.R. Vinod
Anvarkhan
The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Adv. S. Lathakumari
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MACT Neyyattinkara
Disposed
For further hearing
For further hearing
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-03-2026 | For further hearing |
| 12-03-2026 | For further hearing |
| 27-02-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 23-02-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹1,29,000 in compensation to a pedestrian injured by a negligently ridden motorcycle in June 2011. The tribunal accepted the FIR and police charge sheet as prima facie evidence of negligence, establishing liability against the bike owner and insurer. The compensation covered loss of earnings, pain and suffering, medical expenses, transportation, nourishment, and permanent disability assessed at 4%. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded ₹1,29,000 in compensation to a pedestrian injured by a negligently ridden motorcycle in June 2011. The tribunal accepted the FIR and police charge sheet as prima facie evidence of negligence, establishing liability against the bike owner and insurer. The compensation covered loss of earnings, pain and suffering, medical expenses, transportation, nourishment, and permanent disability assessed at 4%. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts