Liberty General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Tejavath Dhanalaxmi Advocate - VISWANATHULA JAGAN MOHAN — MACMA/1654/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section 173. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.
CNR: HBHC010692062025
Filing Number
MACMA/51603/2025
Filing Date
14-Nov-2025
Registration No
MACMA/1654/2025
Registration Date
18-Nov-2025
Judge
Nagesh Bheemapaka
Coram
Nagesh Bheemapaka
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
MACMA ( 18 )
Sub-Category
MACMA(DEATH) ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
CIVIL Section
Last updated 13-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Liberty General Insurance Co. Ltd
Adv. BURUJU PAPA REDDY
Respondent(s)
-
1.Tejavath Dhanalaxmi Advocate - VISWANATHULA JAGAN MOHAN
-
2.Tejavath Lokagnya
-
3.Tejavath Hussain
Adv. VISWANATHULA JAGAN MOHAN
-
4.Tejavath Mangamma
Adv. VISWANATHULA JAGAN MOHAN
-
5.Lanjapalli Uday
Case History
-
29-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
29-Jun-2026
Final Hearing
Nagesh Bheemapaka
-
10-Apr-2026
Nagesh BheemapakaView PDF
-
09-Apr-2026
Admission
Nagesh Bheemapaka
-
12-Mar-2026
Nagesh BheemapakaView PDF
Summary: The High Court of Telangana (IA No. 1 of 2026 in MACMA No. 1654 of 2025) granted permission to the petitioners to withdraw 50% of the amount (Rs. 19,49,321) deposited by Liberty General Insurance Company. The court allowed the withdrawal based on the petitioners' financial hardship following the death of the sole breadwinner, while requiring compliance with established legal procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Feb-2026
Admission
Nagesh Bheemapaka
-
29-Jan-2026
Nagesh BheemapakaView PDF
-
29-Jan-2026
For Admission
Renuka Yara
-
20-Nov-2025
Renuka YaraView PDF
-
20-Nov-2025
Renuka YaraView PDF
-
20-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
14-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. MACMA/1654/2025
Summary: The High Court of Telangana (IA No. 1 of 2026 in MACMA No. 1654 of 2025) granted permission to the petitioners to withdraw 50% of the amount (Rs. 19,49,321) deposited by Liberty General Insurance Company. The court allowed the withdrawal based on the petitioners' financial hardship following the death of the sole breadwinner, while requiring compliance with established legal procedures. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts