D.SENTHILKUMAR vs R.KUMAR AND TWO PERSONS — 9/2021
Case under Tn Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974 Section 140, 166. Status: Orders. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTV030000942021
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
Filing Number
95/2021
Filing Date
18-02-2021
Registration No
9/2021
Registration Date
18-02-2021
Court
Sub Court, Tiruvarur
Judge
3-SUBORDINATE JUDGE.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
D.SENTHILKUMAR
Adv. TMT. B. VINOTHINE B.A., B.L.,
Respondent(s)
R.KUMAR AND TWO PERSONS
Manjula
The Branch Manager
Hearing History
Judge: 3-SUBORDINATE JUDGE.
Orders
Arguments
For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Orders |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 05-03-2026 | For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim |
| 20-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 11-02-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: MCOP No. 09/2021 This is a motor vehicle accident compensation case heard before the Subordinate Judge at Tiruvarur under Section 10 of the 1875 Act. The court recorded the examination-in-chief of the third respondent (witness), who testified regarding the accident and insurance coverage details. The witness confirmed that the vehicle involved in the accident lacked valid insurance on the date of the incident and the driver did not possess a valid driving license. The court found that the insurance institution is liable to pay compensation as per the petition filed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: MCOP No. 09/2021 This is a motor vehicle accident compensation case heard before the Subordinate Judge at Tiruvarur under Section 10 of the 1875 Act. The court recorded the examination-in-chief of the third respondent (witness), who testified regarding the accident and insurance coverage details. The witness confirmed that the vehicle involved in the accident lacked valid insurance on the date of the incident and the driver did not possess a valid driving license. The court found that the insurance institution is liable to pay compensation as per the petition filed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts