BABU vs VENKATESAN — 430/2024
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNMY030025002024
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1462/2024
Filing Date
19-12-2024
Registration No
430/2024
Registration Date
19-12-2024
Court
Principal Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai
Judge
1-Principal Sub Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
BABU
Adv. THIRU. S. NITHINBABU
GAJALAKSHMI
SREE RANJANI REP. BY HER FATHER BABU
Respondent(s)
VENKATESAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal Sub Judge
Evidence
Evidence
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 03-03-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 17-02-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 02-02-2026 | Enquiry |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No.: MCOP. No.430/2024 Court: Principal District Court, Tiladhuthurai Date: 02.02.2026 The court recorded the examination-in-chief of the first petitioner's witness (Babu, age 49) in this motor vehicle accident compensation petition. Multiple documentary evidence was admitted, including FIR report, alteration report, RC books of both vehicles (TN 82B 7033 and TN 82C 1666), post-mortem certificate, death certificate, heirship certificate, and bank account details of both parties. Cross-examination by the opposing counsel's advocate was adjourned, and the witness testimony was recorded and confirmed as accurate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No.: MCOP. No.430/2024 Court: Principal District Court, Tiladhuthurai Date: 02.02.2026 The court recorded the examination-in-chief of the first petitioner's witness (Babu, age 49) in this motor vehicle accident compensation petition. Multiple documentary evidence was admitted, including FIR report, alteration report, RC books of both vehicles (TN 82B 7033 and TN 82C 1666), post-mortem certificate, death certificate, heirship certificate, and bank account details of both parties. Cross-examination by the opposing counsel's advocate was adjourned, and the witness testimony was recorded and confirmed as accurate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts