M Vignesh vs S Maruthachalam — 473/2024
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166(1). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 20th April 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTI210007952024
e-Filing Number
21-08-2024
Filing Number
803/2024
Filing Date
31-Aug-2024
Registration No
473/2024
Registration Date
03-Sep-2024
Court
Sub Court, Palladam
Judge
1-Subordinate Judge
Last updated 19-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M Vignesh
Adv. Mohan V
Respondent(s)
-
1.S Maruthachalam
Case History
-
20-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
26-Mar-2026
Copy of DepositionView PDF
Summary: In case MCOP No. 473/2024 (dated 26.03.2026), witness Vignesha (PW1) was examined and cross-examined regarding a school bus accident that occurred on 25.09.2024 at 4:30 PM. The witness testified about the accident details, medical treatment received, and denied allegations of negligence, stating the bus had speed control devices and the accident was not caused by speeding or his negligence. The petition against the third respondent was ordered to be dismissed based on the witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
26-Mar-2026
Evidence
Subordinate Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence
Subordinate Judge
-
24-Feb-2026
Enquiry
Subordinate Judge
-
09-Jan-2026
Enquiry
Subordinate Judge
-
21-Nov-2025
Enquiry
Subordinate Judge
-
13-Nov-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
19-Sep-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
06-Aug-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
12-Jun-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
17-Mar-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
28-Jan-2025
Counter
Subordinate Judge
-
10-Dec-2024
Issue of Service
Subordinate Judge
-
17-Oct-2024
Issue of Service
Subordinate Judge
-
03-Sep-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
31-Aug-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 473/2024
Summary: In case MCOP No. 473/2024 (dated 26.03.2026), witness Vignesha (PW1) was examined and cross-examined regarding a school bus accident that occurred on 25.09.2024 at 4:30 PM. The witness testified about the accident details, medical treatment received, and denied allegations of negligence, stating the bus had speed control devices and the accident was not caused by speeding or his negligence. The petition against the third respondent was ordered to be dismissed based on the witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts