Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2056 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 March, 2023
-1-
MFA No. 4344 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4344 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
SRI RAVI
S/O TAMMANNA
AGED 30 YEARS,
R/O CHEENYA VILLAGE
NAGAMANGALA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571432
(OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING
REG NO.-KA-54-5135)
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT LEELAVATHI
W/O LATE NARAYANA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
Digitally 2. SRI SWAMYGOWDA
signed by
VEENA S/O LATE NARAYANA GOWDA
KUMARI B
Location: AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
High Court
of BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF:
Karnataka
BEERASHETTYHALLI VILLAGE
RAMAMANDIRA BEEDI
PANDAVAPURA TOWN AND TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571434
3. SRI TAMMANNA @ TAMMANNAGOWDA
S/O LATE BOMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/O CHEENYA VILLAGE, NAGAMANGALA TALUK
-2-
MFA No. 4344 of 2021
MANDYA DISTRICT-571432
(DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE
BEARING REG NO.KA-54-EY-5135)
4. SRI NARASIMHA S N
S/O SHIVANNA
AGED MAJOR, R/O BOGADI SANTEBARE
TATTAKERE POST, HOONAKERE HOBLI
NAGAMANGALA TALUK
MANDY DISTRICT-571432
(INSURER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING
REG NO.KA-54-EY-5135)
5. IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.846, NEW KANTHA RAJA ARAS ROAD
AKSHARA BANDARA, KUVEMPU NAGAR
MYSORE -570023
(INSURER OF THE VEHICEL BEARING)
REG NO.KA-54-EY-5135
POLICY NO.86391227 VALID FROM
140-12014 TO 13-01-2015)
...RESPONDENTS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF
MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.08.05.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.1043/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PANDAVAPURA, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.7,09,600/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT
P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
MFA No. 4344 of 2021
ORDER
None appear in the matter either physically or through
video conference.
2. Inspite of granting sufficient opportunities of not
less than four times, appellant has not made good statutory
deposit. At the earliest point of time the office objection in that
regard was raised by registry, at the time of scrutiny of the
appeal. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Court
which also, on few occasions has granted time to do the
needful in the matter. Inspite of the same, appellant has not
done the needful not even shown any reasons either for not
doing the needful or for nonappearance.
Hence, appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution as
well as for not depositing the statutory amount.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BVK
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!