Hanamantha vs Bademma And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3608 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.201563/2019 (MV)
Between:
Hanamantha S/o Yankappa @ Yankanna,
Age: 54 years, Occ: Business,
R/o: Mittimalkapur village,
Tq. & Dist: Raichur.
                                           ... Appellant
(By Sri Mahadev S. Patil, Advocate)

And:

1.     Bademma D/o Shriramlu,
       Age: 21 years, Occ: Nil,
       R/o: Gonwar village,
       Tq: & Dist: Raichur.

2.     Mahesh S/o Golla Hanumantha,
       Age: 25 years, Occ: Driver,
       R/o: Mattimalkapur village,
       Tq: & Dist: Raichur.

3.     United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
       12-10-89/1 Anaga Complex,
       Mouleshwar Chowk Raichur-544101.
       Policy Cover Note
       No.2402003113P105260629
       Valid from 28.12.2013 to 27.12.2014.
                                         ... Respondents
                              2




      This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of the MV Act, praying to set aside the judgment
and award dated 29.08.2016 passed in MVC No.134/2015
on the file of II-Additional District and Sessions Judge at
Raichur.


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


                       JUDGMENT

This appeal was filed on 08.08.2019. This

matter was listed on 09.12.2019 and two weeks' time

was granted to comply with the office objections.

Thereafter, matter was listed on 09.01.2020 and three

weeks' time was granted for compliance. When the

matter was listed on 18.11.2020, three weeks' time

was granted for compliance making it clear that if

office objections are not complied, the appeal would

be listed for dismissal. The matter was again listed on

14.12.2020, on that day, three week's time was

granted for compliance recalling the peremptory order

dated 18.11.2020. Thereafter, matter was listed on

16.02.2021 and three weeks' time was granted to

comply with the office objections. On 18.03.2021,

finally, a week's time was granted for compliance. On

26.10.2021, one week time was granted to comply

with the office objections subject to payment of cost

of Rs.200/-. When the matter was listed on

06.12.2021, one week time was granted to comply

with the office objections subject to payment of cost

of Rs.500/-. 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 fifth 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*