Branch Manager vs Hanumantha And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3607 Kant

                             1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                         BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI


              MFA No.202198/2019 (MV)

Between:

Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Gandhi Chowk Raichur,
Now represented by
Authorized Signatory
National Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Bilgundi Complex, New Jewargi Road,
Kalaburagi-585 101.
                                            ... Appellant
(By Sri Sanjay M. Joshi, Advocate)

And:

1.     Hanumantha S/o Bajarappa,
       Age: 35 years, Occ: Mason,
       R/o Jalibenchi,
       Tq. & Dist. Raichur-584122.

2.     Mounesh S/o Vishwanatha Kalal,
       Age: Major, Occ: Owner of Cruiser Jeep
       bearing Reg.No.33/A1744
       H.No.1/255, Munduragi Village,
       Tq. and Dist. Yadgir-585 321.
                                          ... Respondents
                               2




      This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of the MV Act praying to call for the entire records
in impugned judgment and award in MVC 96/2018 dated
11.04.2019 of the II-Additional District and Sessions
Judge, and Member MACT Raichur, awarding Rs.1,08,401/-
with interest thereon at 8% per annum and set aside the
same in so far as the liability is saddled upon the appellant
insurance company.


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


                       JUDGMENT

This appeal was filed on 05.11.2019. This

matter was listed on 05.03.2020 and three weeks'

time was granted to comply with the office objections

making it clear that if office objections are not

complied, the appeal would stand dismissed

automatically. The matter was again listed on

01.12.2020, on that day, order dated 05.03.2020 was

recalled and further four weeks' time was granted to

comply with the office objections. On 18.02.2021,

four weeks' time was granted to comply with the office

objections making it clear that if office objections are

not complied, the appeal would stand dismissed. On

12.11.2021, as finally, one week time was granted to

comply with the office objections subject to payment

of costs of Rs.1,000/-. When the matter was listed on

13.12.2021, as finally, one week time was granted for

compliance. It is forthcoming from the records that

inspite of granting several and sufficient opportunities,

the appellant has not complied the office objections

and has not paid the cost.

Today, matter is listed for the sixth time for

compliance of office objections. Inspite of granting

sufficient opportunity, learned counsel for the

appellant has failed to comply with the office

objections. It seems that the appellant is not

interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the

appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office

objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE NB*