S.Munjunath vs S.Prakash — 19/2023

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 166. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 09th April 2026.

MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition

CNR: TNKI160005842023

Case disposed

Filing Number

369/2023

Filing Date

25-01-2022

Registration No

19/2023

Registration Date

22-12-2023

Court

Sub Court, Denkanikottai

Judge

3-Subordinate Judge, Denkanikottai

Decision Date

09th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 166

Petitioner(s)

S.Munjunath

Adv. KADRESAN M

Respondent(s)

S.Prakash

The Branch Manager Cholamandalam Ms. General Insurance Co., Ltd., Hosur

S.Venkatesan

The magnager, ShriRam Generala Insurance Co., Ltd.,

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Subordinate Judge, Denkanikottai

09-04-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

Steps

19-02-2026

Steps

05-02-2026

Steps

29-01-2026

Steps

Interim Orders

27-03-2024
Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

Case Summary: S. Munjunath v. S. Prakash and Others (19/2023) The petitioner S. Munjunath sought compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident near Hosur, claiming he lost a leg requiring permanent medical treatment. The court found the petitioner lacked a valid driving license at the time of the accident and that he failed to produce documentary evidence of his medical expenses, with discrepancies between claimed amounts (₹3,40,404) and actual payments (₹2,64,000). The court dismissed the petition against respondents 1 and 2 (first respondent's vehicle owner and insurer) as they were non-parties to the accident, and dismissed claims against respondent 3 (the actual driver) due to the petitioner's lack of proper licensing and insufficient substantiation of damages. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: S. Munjunath v. S. Prakash and Others (19/2023) The petitioner S. Munjunath sought compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident near Hosur, claiming he lost a leg requiring permanent medical treatment. The court found the petitioner lacked a valid driving license at the time of the accident and that he failed to produce documentary evidence of his medical expenses, with discrepancies between claimed amounts (₹3,40,404) and actual payments (₹2,64,000). The court dismissed the petition against respondents 1 and 2 (first respondent's vehicle owner and insurer) as they were non-parties to the accident, and dismissed claims against respondent 3 (the actual driver) due to the petitioner's lack of proper licensing and insufficient substantiation of damages. 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

Sub Court, Denkanikottai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case