The Branch Manager vs Madhusudhan S/O Chennareddy And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2495 Kant

                              1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

                MFA No.32158/2012 (MV)

Between:

The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Lingasugur Road, Raichur
Through its
The Divisional Manager,
National Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Bilgundi Complex, Opp. Mini Vidhan Soudha,
Station Road, Gulbarga.
                                             ... Appellant
(By Sri. Sanjay.M.Joshi, Advocate)

And:

1.     Madhusudhan S/o Chennareddy,
       Age: 34 years, Occ: BMTC Bus
       Driver-cum-Conductor
       R/o Maddipet, Raichur-584101.

2.     S.Nagesh S/o Venkataiah,
       Age: 26 years, Occ: Driver of Lorry
       Bearing No.AP27/V-8341,
       R/o Konde Bheema-napalli village,
       Devarakonda Mandalam,
       Dist. Nelagonda (A.P.)
                               2




3.    B.Ranjith Kumar S/o B. Narayana,
      Age: Major, Occ: Owner of Lorry,
      R/o C/o M.Anjineyulu,
      Plot No.12, Gokul Enclave Road,
      North Hastinapur,
      Near Santhoshi Mata Temple,
      Sagar Road, Hyderabad (A.P)-500002.

                                           ... Respondents
(Sri.Arunkumar A, Advocate for R1)

       This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of the MV Act praying to call for the records allow
this appeal and set aside the judgment and award passed
in MVC No.192/201 on 29th June 2012, by the Presiding
Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC-1) At Raichur,
awarding compensation of Rs.1,07,300/-, in favour of the
original petitioner, with 6% interest from the date of the
petition to the date of the deposit of amount.

      This appeal coming on for orders this day, the Court
delivered the following:-


                       JUDGMENT

This Court vide order dated 30.03.2021 a week's

time is granted to do the needful, failing which the

appeal would stand dismissed automatically.

Even today, the learned counsel appearing for

the appellant seeks time to do the needful.

In view of the peremptory order passed by this

Court, I do not find any ground to grant further time.

Accordingly, appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE SMP