LAKSHMI vs MS SUNRISE TRADER AND ELE PROP GOMATHI SIVAKUMAR — 56/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 166. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTU040000572026
Next Hearing
28th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
57/2026
Filing Date
18-04-2023
Registration No
56/2026
Registration Date
29-01-2026
Court
Special Sub Court to deal with MCOP cases, Tirupathur
Judge
4-Special Subordiante Judge (MACT),Thirupattur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
LAKSHMI
Adv. PALANISAMY S
PRIYADHARSHINI
Respondent(s)
MS SUNRISE TRADER AND ELE PROP GOMATHI SIVAKUMAR
UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
SATHIYAVANI
CHOLA MS GENERAL INSURANCE COM LTD
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Special Subordiante Judge (MACT),Thirupattur
Evidence
Evidence
Orders
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 09-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 06-04-2026 | Orders | |
| 27-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: In this Motor Accident Claims Petition (MCOP No. 56/2026) dated 17.04.2026 before the Special MACT at Tiruppattur, the court recorded the affidavit and cross-examination statements of the 1st and 4th respondents regarding a motor vehicle accident involving vehicle TN 10 BF 2482. The court found that the accident was caused by the negligence of the vehicle driver Ilaiyaraja and held both the owner and the 2nd respondent (insurance company) liable for compensation. The petition has been allowed with directions for compensation to be awarded to the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In this Motor Accident Claims Petition (MCOP No. 56/2026) dated 17.04.2026 before the Special MACT at Tiruppattur, the court recorded the affidavit and cross-examination statements of the 1st and 4th respondents regarding a motor vehicle accident involving vehicle TN 10 BF 2482. The court found that the accident was caused by the negligence of the vehicle driver Ilaiyaraja and held both the owner and the 2nd respondent (insurance company) liable for compensation. The petition has been allowed with directions for compensation to be awarded to the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts