Rukmani vs Ganapathy — 422/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 1661a. Disposed: Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat on 14th March 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNCB110013352025
e-Filing Number
27-10-2025
Filing Number
1496/2025
Filing Date
27-Oct-2025
Registration No
422/2025
Registration Date
27-Oct-2025
Court
Sub Court, Pollachi
Judge
1-Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rukmani
Adv. Raveendran S
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ganapathy
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
Case 422/2025 Summary: In this motor vehicle insurance dispute resolved through Lok Adalat (Pollachi Sub Court), petitioner Rukmani settled her claim against respondents Ganapathy, Jagankumar, and National Insurance Company Ltd. The court awarded Rs. 2,50,000 (Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand) to the petitioner as full settlement of the insurance claim. The insurer was directed to deposit the amount within 30 days, with interest at 7.5% p.a. if payment is delayed, and all court fees paid by the petitioner were refunded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
28-Jan-2026
Issue of Process
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
19-Dec-2025
Appearance
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
27-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 422/2025
Case 422/2025 Summary: In this motor vehicle insurance dispute resolved through Lok Adalat (Pollachi Sub Court), petitioner Rukmani settled her claim against respondents Ganapathy, Jagankumar, and National Insurance Company Ltd. The court awarded Rs. 2,50,000 (Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand) to the petitioner as full settlement of the insurance claim. The insurer was directed to deposit the amount within 30 days, with interest at 7.5% p.a. if payment is delayed, and all court fees paid by the petitioner were refunded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts