Nagalingham vs Balaiyan Advocate - Thiru.T.Elakkiadasan, B.Com., B.L., — 58/2023
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 140,166. Status: Await Reports. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
MCOP - Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition
CNR: TNTV140000742023
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
39/2023
Filing Date
18-02-2020
Registration No
58/2023
Registration Date
01-09-2020
Court
SubCourt, Thiruthuraipoondi
Judge
4-Subordinate Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Nagalingham
Adv. Thiru.G.Arunprasath B.Sc., B.L.,
Respondent(s)
Balaiyan Advocate - Thiru.T.Elakkiadasan, B.Com., B.L.,
The branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd,
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Subordinate Judge
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | Await Reports |
| 12-03-2026 | Await Reports |
| 19-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 05-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 19-01-2026 | Await Reports |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No: MCOP 58/2023 | Court: Subordinate Court, Tirutturaipundi | Date: 19.10.2023 The court examined evidence in a motor vehicle accident case involving 11 passengers in a vehicle authorized for only 9. The court found the first defendant (driver) liable for the accident due to vehicle overcrowding causing loss of control, while dismissing claims against the second defendant (insurance company) as the policy was valid and the loss was caused by the driver's negligence. The case of the first defendant was dismissed, with the court directing compensation claims be pursued against the second defendant (insurance). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No: MCOP 58/2023 | Court: Subordinate Court, Tirutturaipundi | Date: 19.10.2023 The court examined evidence in a motor vehicle accident case involving 11 passengers in a vehicle authorized for only 9. The court found the first defendant (driver) liable for the accident due to vehicle overcrowding causing loss of control, while dismissing claims against the second defendant (insurance company) as the policy was valid and the loss was caused by the driver's negligence. The case of the first defendant was dismissed, with the court directing compensation claims be pursued against the second defendant (insurance). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts