Kannan vs Selvakumar Advocate - Exparte — 151/2024

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 18th March 2026.

Arguments Next hearing 18-Mar-2026 this date has passed

MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition

CNR: TNPB020027672024

e-Filing Number

02-07-2024

Filing Number

98/2024

Filing Date

08-Jul-2024

Registration No

151/2024

Registration Date

08-Jul-2024

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Perambalur

Judge

3-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Last updated 11-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kannan

    Adv. C. GANESAN, B.Com., B.L.,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Selvakumar Advocate - Exparte

  2. 2.The Manager, United India Insurance Co Ltd

    Adv. A. ANAND, B.Com., B.L.,

Case History

  1. 18-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 05-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  3. 13-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 29-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  5. 12-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  6. 11-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  7. 27-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  8. 21-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  9. 01-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  10. 23-Oct-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  11. 14-Oct-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  12. 07-Oct-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  13. 30-Sep-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  14. 16-Sep-2025

    Arguments

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  15. 02-Sep-2025

    Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

    This is a Tamil-language court order from Perambalur dated September 2, 2025, in a vehicle insurance dispute (MCOP 151/2024 C/w 152, 164, 165, 183, 184/2024). The case concerns insurance coverage for a vehicle, with the insurance company arguing that only 9 persons were covered under the policy at Rs. 50 per person (total Rs. 450), while the claimant seeks compensation for 10 persons. The court found merit in the insurance company's defense citing Indian Motor Tariff Regulation 16, and accordingly dismissed the claim, ruling that the insurer is not liable to pay compensation for the additional person beyond those covered under the policy terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  16. 02-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  17. 26-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  18. 19-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  19. 14-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  20. 07-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  21. 22-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  22. 01-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  23. 24-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  24. 17-Jun-2025

    Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

  25. 17-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  26. 10-Jun-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  27. 03-Jun-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  28. 08-May-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  29. 06-May-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  30. 22-Apr-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  31. 15-Apr-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  32. 03-Apr-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  33. 20-Mar-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  34. 13-Mar-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  35. 04-Mar-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  36. 20-Feb-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  37. 06-Feb-2025

    Enquiry

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  38. 30-Jan-2025

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  39. 02-Jan-2025

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  40. 07-Dec-2024

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  41. 21-Nov-2024

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  42. 24-Oct-2024

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  43. 10-Oct-2024

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  44. 21-Sep-2024

    Counter

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  45. 17-Sep-2024

    Service Pending-Notice

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  46. 20-Aug-2024

    Service Pending-Notice

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  47. 23-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  48. 08-Jul-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 151/2024

casestatus.in Summary

This is a Tamil-language court order from Perambalur dated September 2, 2025, in a vehicle insurance dispute (MCOP 151/2024 C/w 152, 164, 165, 183, 184/2024). The case concerns insurance coverage for a vehicle, with the insurance company arguing that only 9 persons were covered under the policy at Rs. 50 per person (total Rs. 450), while the claimant seeks compensation for 10 persons. The court found merit in the insurance company's defense citing Indian Motor Tariff Regulation 16, and accordingly dismissed the claim, ruling that the insurer is not liable to pay compensation for the additional person beyond those covered under the policy terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case