Rajababu Sundarsingh Pawar vs Gautam Dilip Khandare — 30/2024
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166. Status: Written Statement. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.
M.A.C.P. - Motor Accident Claim Petition
CNR: MHWS010009952024
Next Hearing
29th June 2026
e-Filing Number
23-08-2024
Filing Number
617/2024
Filing Date
23-08-2024
Registration No
30/2024
Registration Date
28-08-2024
Court
District and Sessions Court, Washim
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajababu Sundarsingh Pawar
Adv. CHAVAN DILIPSING DASHRATHSING
Respondent(s)
Gautam Dilip Khandare
Kailas Narayan Malekar
M/s Shree Balaji Autobikes Washim
HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co Ltd
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Washim
Written Statement
No Say Order
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | Written Statement |
| 28-04-2026 | No Say Order |
| 10-04-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 30-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 16-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: MACP No. 30/2024 The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Washim, kept in abeyance the application seeking deletion of the Insurance Company, finding factual issues requiring evidence. The vehicle was newly purchased and the accident occurred on the purchase date itself, with insurance commencing that same night. The tribunal deemed evidence necessary to determine the exact policy commencement time and kept all Insurance Company contentions open for final hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: MACP No. 30/2024 The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Washim, kept in abeyance the application seeking deletion of the Insurance Company, finding factual issues requiring evidence. The vehicle was newly purchased and the accident occurred on the purchase date itself, with insurance commencing that same night. The tribunal deemed evidence necessary to determine the exact policy commencement time and kept all Insurance Company contentions open for final hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts