Dhanraj S/o. Bharatram Chute (Injury Case)(Insuracne) vs Nilam W/o. Dilipkumar Yadav- — 92/2022
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 01st April 2026.
M.A.C.P. - Motor Accident Claim Petition
CNR: MHGO010004432022
Filing Number
253/2022
Filing Date
16-03-2022
Registration No
92/2022
Registration Date
19-03-2022
Court
District and Session Court , Gondia
Judge
5-Principal District and Sessions Judge Gondia
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dhanraj S/o. Bharatram Chute (Injury Case)(Insuracne)
Adv. Bansod Smt. M. S.
Respondent(s)
Nilam W/o. Dilipkumar Yadav-
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Adv. Bhajipale R.N.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Principal District and Sessions Judge Gondia
Disposed
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 25-02-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 21-01-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 24-12-2025 | Defence Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 19,21,161 in compensation to the claimant who suffered amputation of his right hand and permanent disability following a truck collision on 01.01.2022. The court held the truck owner and her insurer jointly and severally liable, rejecting the insurer's defense regarding missing driver documentation, as the insurance company failed to prove breach of policy terms despite being better positioned to verify such details. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 19,21,161 in compensation to the claimant who suffered amputation of his right hand and permanent disability following a truck collision on 01.01.2022. The court held the truck owner and her insurer jointly and severally liable, rejecting the insurer's defense regarding missing driver documentation, as the insurance company failed to prove breach of policy terms despite being better positioned to verify such details. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts