The Branch Manager, Icici Lombard ... vs Sitaram And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 10079 Kant

                           1


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
                MFA No.201318/2021 (MV)

BETWEEN:

THE BRANCH MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD., A.K.ASIAN,
GRAND, 3RD FLOOR, OPP: GESCOM
HEAD OFFICE, STATION ROAD,
KALABURAGI.
                                             ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI C.S.KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SITARAM, S/O LAXMAN RATHOD,
       AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

2.     SHANTABAI, W/O SITARAM RATHOD,
       AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

3.     SAVITA, W/O VISHWANATH RATHOD,
       AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,

4.     SNEHA @ SONABAI
       D/O VISHWANATH RATHOD,
       AGE: 17 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED
       BY RESPNDENT NO.3.

5.     SHARATH, S/O VISHWANATH RATHOD,
       AGE: 15 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED
       BY RESPONDENT NO.3.
                                 2


6.     SUMIT S/O VISHWANATH RATHOD,
       AGE: 13 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED
       BY RESPONDENT NO.3.

       ALL ARE R/O KAMATAGI,
       TQ. & DIST. VIJAYPURA.

7.     SIDDARAYA, S/O. BABURAYA PATIL
       AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
       R/O. HIRE-RUGI, TQ: INDI
       DIST: VIJAYAPURA
                                             ... RESPONDENTS
     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 10TH MARCH-2020 PASSED BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.IV AT VIJAYAPURA IN MVC
NO.365/2016 AND TO MODIFY THE COMPENSATION
AWARDED AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS
THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE COSTS.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

                         JUDGMENT

The appeal is of the year 2021. In spite of granting sufficient opportunity, the office objections are not complied. It appears, the appellant-Insurance Company is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KGR*