- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3250 CRP No. 200032 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.200032 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. GANGABAI W/O RAMAJI @ RAMASINGH CHAVAN, AGE : 55 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, 2. RAJU RAMAJI @ RAMASINGH CHAVAN, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, 3. PAPU RAMAJI @ RAMASINGH CHAVAN, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, ALL ARE R/O: KUMATAGI, L.T. VIJAYAPURA – 586 127. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. AYUB SALAM SARDAR ALI HAWALDAR, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: BENDIGERI GALLI, OPPOSITE GOLGUMBAZ, STATION ROAD, VIJAYAPURA – 586 101. 2. THE MANAGER LEGAL CLAIMS, THE SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., S-5, 2ND FLOOR, MONARCH CHAMBERS, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3250 CRP No. 200032 of 2025 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.11.2023 PASSED IN REVIEW PETITION NO.1/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XV, VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA AND ALLOW THIS CRP AND THE GRANT THE RELIEFS AS CLAIMED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging order dated 20.11.2023 passed by IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XV, Vijayapura in Revision Petition no.1/2023, this Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC. Registry has raised office objection about maintainability of this petition. 2. Sri Bapugouda Siddappa, learned counsel for petitioners submitted revision was by claimants in MVC no.687/2019 and same was allowed by MACT-XV, Vijayapura on 13.07.2022, awarding compensation of Rs.2,49,500/- and held owner and insurer of offending vehicle jointly and severely liable to pay same. Seeking for review of said award, insurer filed RP no.1/2023, which was allowed by tribunal under - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3250 CRP No. 200032 of 2025 impugned order. It was submitted that since, there is no provision for appeal against an order in Review Petition and this Court in WP no.25523/2005, disposed off on 14.12.2007 had permitted conversion of writ petition into civil revision petition against an order rejecting I.A.no.3, filed in first appeal, he sought for over-ruling office objection about maintainability. 3. Though, Section 115 of CPC provides for filing of revision against an order, in case provision for appeal is not available, proviso to Section 115 reads as under: “Provided that the High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where the order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings.” 4. It would imply that unless order sought to be revised, if passed in favour of petitioners, would finally decide matter, provision for revision cannot be availed. In instant case, allowing of revision and setting aside of order passed in revision would not lead to such consequences by itself, as claim petition was disposed of earlier. In fact, order modifying award may also be an award. Even decision of this Court in WP - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3250 CRP No. 200032 of 2025 no.25523/2005 would not be an authority for maintainability of revision, as petitioner therein was permitted to convert writ petition into civil revision petition on request. 5. Hence, office objection is sustained and petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE NJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7