Rajeev vs Akshay.T.S. — 143/2023

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section sec166(1). Disposed: Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition

CNR: TNCB190006312023

Filing Number

586/2023

Filing Date

04-Jul-2023

Registration No

143/2023

Registration Date

05-Jul-2023

Court

Sub Court, Mettupalayam

Judge

2-Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section sec166(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rajeev

    Adv. Prabhakaran.V

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Akshay.T.S.

  2. 2.Gineesh E.K.

  3. 3.The Branch Manater

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Case 143/2023 Summary: The Mettupalayam Taluk Legal Services Committee settled a vehicle insurance dispute between petitioner Rajeev and respondent Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Ltd through Lok Adalat. The court ordered the insurer to pay Rs. 2,50,000 (Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand) to the petitioner as full settlement, with the respondent having 45 days to remit the amount to the Sub Judge's account. Court fees paid by the petitioner shall be refunded, and both parties agreed to bear their respective costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Lok Adalat

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Restored

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Lok Adalat

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  7. 13-Mar-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  8. 13-Mar-2025

    Disposed

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  9. 08-Mar-2025

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  10. 06-Mar-2025

    Lok Adalat

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  11. 30-Jan-2025

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  12. 19-Dec-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  13. 05-Dec-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  14. 07-Nov-2024

    Lok Adalat

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  15. 17-Oct-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  16. 12-Sep-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  17. 29-Aug-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  18. 22-Aug-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  19. 18-Jul-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  20. 04-Jul-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  21. 20-Jun-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  22. 06-Jun-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  23. 04-Apr-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  24. 07-Mar-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  25. 29-Jan-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  26. 25-Jan-2024

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  27. 07-Dec-2023

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  28. 09-Nov-2023

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  29. 19-Oct-2023

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  30. 05-Oct-2023

    Enquiry

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  31. 07-Sep-2023

    Counter

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  32. 08-Aug-2023

    Counter

    Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam

  33. 05-Jul-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  34. 04-Jul-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 143/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case 143/2023 Summary: The Mettupalayam Taluk Legal Services Committee settled a vehicle insurance dispute between petitioner Rajeev and respondent Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Ltd through Lok Adalat. The court ordered the insurer to pay Rs. 2,50,000 (Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand) to the petitioner as full settlement, with the respondent having 45 days to remit the amount to the Sub Judge's account. Court fees paid by the petitioner shall be refunded, and both parties agreed to bear their respective costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case