Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2312 Kant
Judgement Date : 20 April, 2023
-1-
MFA No. 372 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 372 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
Ganesh. S,
S/o. Sriramappa,
Aged 24 Years,
R/o. No.484,
First Floor, EWS,
4th Phase, SFS 707,
Yelahanka New Town,
Bangalore - 64.
...Appellant
(By Sri. H. K. Basavaraj, Advocate)
AND:
1. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd
Digitally signed
by its Manager,
by BANGALORE
MADHAVACHAR Krishi Bhavan Building,
6th Floor,
VEENA
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka Near Hudson Circle,
Bangalore - 560 001.
2. Ramesh Naik
Aged Major,
No.39, Ist Cross,
J.P. Nagar, 5th phase,
Bangalore - 78.
...Respondents
(By Sri. Jwala Kumar, Advocate for R-1;
R2 - Notice dispensed with vide order dt. 24-11-2017)
-2-
MFA No. 372 of 2017
***
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, praying to call for the records
and modify the judgment and award by enhancing the
compensation from Rs.1,70,000/- to Rs.6,00,000/- (Rs. Six
lakhs only) in M.V.C.No.789/2014 dated.22.09.2015 passed by
the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bangalore City
and grant cost and interest throughout, granting such other
reliefs as deemed fit, in the interest of justice.
This Miscellaneous First Appeal coming on for Final
Hearing through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing, this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellant neither present
physically nor through video conference. No reasons are
forthcoming for his non-appearance in the matter.
Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 is
physically present in the Court.
A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that,
the present appeal is of the year 2017, as such, it is one
of the old matters of this nature pending before this
roster. On the previous date of hearing, that was on the
date 16-11-2022, the learned counsel for the appellant had
MFA No. 372 of 2017
remained absent though the learned counsel for
respondent No.1 was present. Subsequently, on the date
30-11-2022, it was at the request of the learned counsel
for the appellant, the matter was adjourned. Once again
the matter was adjourned at the request of the learned
counsel for the appellant only, on 10-01-2023. The same
makes it clear that even though the matter is being taken
up repeatedly, the learned counsel for the appellant is not
showing any inclination to proceed further in the matter.
Hence, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BMV*
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!