National Insurance Company(Not Applicable) vs Sandeep Kumar(Not Applicable) Advocate - NEMO, ,Roshan Lal,Paresh Sharma,Rajiv Rai — FAO/205/2020
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: HPHC010289222020
Filing Number
FAO/25401/2020
Filing Date
27-Aug-2020
Registration No
FAO/205/2020
Registration Date
21-Sep-2020
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.National Insurance Company(Not Applicable)
Adv. Mayank Sharma,Ishan Sharma,Ishan Sharma, ,Ishan Sharma
Respondent(s)
-
1.Sandeep Kumar(Not Applicable) Advocate - NEMO, ,Roshan Lal,Paresh Sharma,Rajiv Rai
Case History
-
—
Next hearingPending
-
23-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
Case FAO(MVA) No. 205/2020 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sandeep Kumar & others) was called on March 23, 2026 with all parties represented through their respective advocates. The case was adjourned as the power of attorney filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 was not on record; counsel was directed to follow up with the Registry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
26-Feb-2026
Additional Registrar(j)View PDF
-
02-Jan-2026
Additional Registrar(j)View PDF
-
11-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
-
11-Dec-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
-
10-Nov-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
-
10-Nov-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
-
14-Oct-2025
Additional Registrar(j)View PDF
-
06-Oct-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
-
28-Nov-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF
-
23-Sep-2020
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
-
23-Sep-2020
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Aug-2020
Case filed
Registration No. FAO/205/2020
Case FAO(MVA) No. 205/2020 (National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sandeep Kumar & others) was called on March 23, 2026 with all parties represented through their respective advocates. The case was adjourned as the power of attorney filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 was not on record; counsel was directed to follow up with the Registry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts