Chhaya Maruti Pokharkar And Other 2 vs Razak Mohd Shaikh And do Digit Gen Ins Advocate - — 1487/2024

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166, Fatal. Status: For ISSUES. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.

MACP - Motor Accident Claim Petition

CNR: MHMT010017362024

For ISSUES

Next Hearing

10th June 2026

Filing Number

1756/2024

Filing Date

20-07-2024

Registration No

1487/2024

Registration Date

22-08-2024

Court

MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI

Judge

1-H. H. Chairman

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section 166, Fatal

Petitioner(s)

Chhaya Maruti Pokharkar And Other 2

Adv. Mehta U. N.

Respondent(s)

Razak Mohd Shaikh And do Digit Gen Ins Advocate -

Khan T.

Golande S.D.

Go Digit Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd.

Adv. Golande S. D.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-H. H. Chairman

14-03-2026

For ISSUES

12-03-2026

For ISSUES

23-02-2026

For ISSUES

30-01-2026

AMEND PLAINT

20-01-2026

SAY HEARING ON EXH.____READY

Interim Orders

30-01-2026
Order on Exh.
30-01-2026
Order on Exh.

MACP No. 1487/2024 - Summary The application seeking amendment to implead the deceased's married sisters (Mrs. Punam Abhijit Dumbare and Mrs. Neelam Maruti Pokharkar) as co-claimants was rejected. The court held that since Class-I legal heirs (wife, minor son, and mother) are already parties and contesting the claim, adding the married sisters—who showed no financial dependency and whose presence is unnecessary for effective adjudication—would only complicate proceedings without legal benefit. Motor Vehicles Act compensation is primarily payable for loss of dependency, not mere legal representation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

MACP No. 1487/2024 - Summary The application seeking amendment to implead the deceased's married sisters (Mrs. Punam Abhijit Dumbare and Mrs. Neelam Maruti Pokharkar) as co-claimants was rejected. The court held that since Class-I legal heirs (wife, minor son, and mother) are already parties and contesting the claim, adding the married sisters—who showed no financial dependency and whose presence is unnecessary for effective adjudication—would only complicate proceedings without legal benefit. Motor Vehicles Act compensation is primarily payable for loss of dependency, not mere legal representation. 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

MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case