Kalloleppa Alias Kallappa S/O Pundalik ... vs Dhareppa S/O Laxmappa Karayappanavar
2025 Latest Caselaw 10779 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Kalloleppa Alias Kallappa S/O Pundalik ... vs Dhareppa S/O Laxmappa Karayappanavar on 27 November, 2025

                                                      -1-
                                                                NC: 2025:KHC-D:16571
                                                             MFA No. 101250 of 2022


                             HC-KAR




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
                           DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
                                                BEFORE
                         THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

                      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101250 OF 2022 (MV-I)

                            BETWEEN:

                            KALLOLEPPA @ KALLAPPA
                            S/O. PUNDALIK BACHANNAVAR,
                            AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER & AGRI. NOW NIL,
                            R/O. MAKKALAGERI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
                                                                           ...APPELLANT
                            (BY SRI. BAHUBALI N. KANABARGI, ADVOCATE)

                            AND:
                            1.   DHAREPPA
                                 S/O. LAXMAPPA KARAYAPPANAVAR,
                                 AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS & AGRICULTURE,
                                 R/O. MELAVANKI, TQ: GOKAK-591218,
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI                         (OWNER OF MOTORCYCLE BEARING
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI               REG.NO.KA-49/K-1944)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
                            2.   THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                                 R/BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
                                 MAHADEV PLAZA CTS NO.10719,
                                 SY.NO.135/A, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE,
                                 NEHARU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001.
                                                                      ...RESPONDENTS
                            (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
                                SRI. SUBHASH J. BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
                                    -2-
                                                NC: 2025:KHC-D:16571
                                            MFA No. 101250 of 2022


HC-KAR




     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFIED
THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.04.2021, PASSED BY THE IN THE
COURT OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT GOKAK M.V.C. NO.2622/2018.
AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED BY THE
APPELLANT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS PASSED THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:        THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

                             ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)

1. No representation on appellant's side on call.

2. Sri. Santosh S. Hattikatagi, learned counsel for

respondent No.1 and Sri.Subhash J. Baddi, learned

counsel for respondent No.2 are present.

3. On 24.11.2025, following order was passed:

"No representation on appellant's side on call.

Sri.Santhosh S.Hattikatagi, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that after passing of award by the Tribunal, the appellant filed an execution petition and in the execution petition, the matter was settled before the Lok Adalath and respondent No.1 paid the entire award amount towards full and final settlement and the appellant

NC: 2025:KHC-D:16571

HC-KAR

received the same duly signing the award passed and recording the same, the Executing Court closed the EP proceedings and thus, the appeal does not survive for consideration. Learned counsel filed the certified copy of the order sheet in Execution Petition No.124/2021 that stood pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak.

Sri.Santosh S.Hattikatagi, learned counsel for respondent No.1 also states that the appellant failed to contest the matter in the light of the settlement thus arrived at.

Sri.Subhash J.Baddi, learned counsel for respondent No.2 endorses the submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.1. However, to give fair opportunity to the appellant to make his submission, list the matter on 27.11.2025. In case the appellant fails to represent the matter even on that day, the appeal will be dismissed considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.1 and due to non-prosecution of the appeal by the appellant herein."

4. Even on passing the aforementioned order, appellant did

not choose to represent. Therefore it is clear that the

appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

5. Hence the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab CT-MCK