Rajan vs Nabaskhan — 728/2024
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166,140. Disposed: Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat on 14th March 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTL010045432024
e-Filing Number
25-03-2024
Filing Number
1091/2024
Filing Date
26-03-2024
Registration No
728/2024
Registration Date
27-03-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Tirunelveli
Judge
2-I-Additional District Judge
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajan
Adv. Ravisankar Gopalakishnan
Respondent(s)
Nabaskhan
Hearing History
Judge: 2-I-Additional District Judge
Disposed
Lok Adalat
Part Heard
Part Heard
Enquiry
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Lok Adalat |
| 12-02-2026 | Part Heard |
| 22-01-2026 | Part Heard |
| 27-11-2025 | Enquiry |
Interim Orders
This document is a witness deposition record, not a court judgment. It records the sworn testimony of witness Rajan (PW-1), age 43, in case M.C.O.P. No. 728/2024 before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge in Tirunelveli on January 22, 2026. Rajan testified regarding a motor vehicle accident, asserting his vehicle was registered in his name, he possessed valid driving license and insurance, and that respondent Nabaskhan bore primary responsibility for the collision due to negligent driving. The deposition includes cross-examination responses where Rajan refuted various counterarguments raised by defendants 2 and 3. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a witness deposition record, not a court judgment. It records the sworn testimony of witness Rajan (PW-1), age 43, in case M.C.O.P. No. 728/2024 before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge in Tirunelveli on January 22, 2026. Rajan testified regarding a motor vehicle accident, asserting his vehicle was registered in his name, he possessed valid driving license and insurance, and that respondent Nabaskhan bore primary responsibility for the collision due to negligent driving. The deposition includes cross-examination responses where Rajan refuted various counterarguments raised by defendants 2 and 3. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts