KESHAV MISHRA vs BS.JOTHI RAMAN — 30/2019
Case under --- Section 166,142. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTR090000982019
Next Hearing
17th June 2026
Filing Number
69/2019
Filing Date
19-01-2019
Registration No
30/2019
Registration Date
19-01-2019
Court
III. Additional District and Sessions Court, Poonamallee
Judge
2-Additional District and Sessions Judge - III
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KESHAV MISHRA
Adv. A.JAYAKUMAR
Respondent(s)
BS.JOTHI RAMAN
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Additional District and Sessions Judge - III
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 30-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 11-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: MCOP.30/2019 This motor vehicle accident case involved testimony from witness Yugandhar (RW1) before the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Thiruvallur on 07-08-2025. The witness, a Diploma Mechanical Engineer, testified regarding a vehicle accident where a two-wheeler collided with a parked car. The witness admitted fault for the accident, stating he had parked the vehicle improperly, and the collision occurred due to a tire puncture. Cross-examinations by both petitioner and second respondent were conducted regarding accident circumstances and liability. The proceedings involved evidentiary testimony under the Indian Evidence Act, 1873, with further examination of facts related to vehicle damage and injury claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: MCOP.30/2019 This motor vehicle accident case involved testimony from witness Yugandhar (RW1) before the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Thiruvallur on 07-08-2025. The witness, a Diploma Mechanical Engineer, testified regarding a vehicle accident where a two-wheeler collided with a parked car. The witness admitted fault for the accident, stating he had parked the vehicle improperly, and the collision occurred due to a tire puncture. Cross-examinations by both petitioner and second respondent were conducted regarding accident circumstances and liability. The proceedings involved evidentiary testimony under the Indian Evidence Act, 1873, with further examination of facts related to vehicle damage and injury claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts