VELMAYIL ALIAS VELUMAYIL vs GOPINATH AND ONE ANOTHER — 260/2019

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 140,166. Disposed: Uncontested--Returned on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition

CNR: TNKR080005212019

Filing Number

536/2019

Filing Date

15-Apr-2019

Registration No

260/2019

Registration Date

22-Apr-2019

Court

Sub Court, Kulithalai

Judge

12-Sub Judge

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Returned

Last updated 18-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 140,166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VELMAYIL ALIAS VELUMAYIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GOPINATH AND ONE ANOTHER

  2. 2.THE ORIENTAL ONSURANCE CO LTD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Kulithalai dismissed the claimant's petition seeking ₹10,00,000 compensation for a two-wheeler accident, finding that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction as the claimant failed to provide proper residential proof documents required under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166(2). The court ordered the petition to be returned and directed the claimant to file the application in the appropriate tribunal within two months, emphasizing that verified government-issued identity documents or sworn affidavits are mandatory to establish jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Sub Judge

  4. 05-Mar-2026

    Orders

    Sub Judge

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    Orders

    Sub Judge

  6. 11-Dec-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Sub Judge

  7. 02-Dec-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Sub Judge

  8. 18-Sep-2025

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  9. 29-Jul-2025

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  10. 03-Jun-2025

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  11. 27-Feb-2025

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  12. 07-Jan-2025

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  13. 07-Nov-2024

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  14. 13-Aug-2024

    Await Reports

    Sub Judge

  15. 18-Jun-2024

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  16. 21-Mar-2024

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  17. 08-Feb-2024

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  18. 23-Nov-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  19. 21-Sep-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  20. 18-Jul-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  21. 20-Apr-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  22. 09-Mar-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  23. 03-Jan-2023

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  24. 13-Oct-2022

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  25. 20-Jul-2022

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  26. 22-Apr-2022

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  27. 18-Feb-2022

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  28. 10-Dec-2021

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  29. 17-Sep-2021

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  30. 23-Jun-2021

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  31. 17-Mar-2021

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  32. 08-Jan-2021

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  33. 09-Oct-2020

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  34. 24-Jul-2020

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  35. 24-Apr-2020

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  36. 19-Feb-2020

    Enquiry

    Sub Judge

  37. 06-Dec-2019

    Counter

    Sub Judge

  38. 25-Oct-2019

    Counter

    Sub Judge

  39. 18-Sep-2019

    Counter

    Sub Judge

  40. 23-Jul-2019

    Counter

    Sub Judge

  41. 20-Jun-2019

    Counter

    Sub Judge

  42. 18-Jun-2019

    Issue of Process

    Sub Judge

  43. 23-Apr-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  44. 15-Apr-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 260/2019

casestatus.in Summary

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Kulithalai dismissed the claimant's petition seeking ₹10,00,000 compensation for a two-wheeler accident, finding that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction as the claimant failed to provide proper residential proof documents required under Motor Vehicles Act Section 166(2). The court ordered the petition to be returned and directed the claimant to file the application in the appropriate tribunal within two months, emphasizing that verified government-issued identity documents or sworn affidavits are mandatory to establish jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case