- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2865 MFA No. 203508 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.203508 OF 2024 (ECA) BETWEEN: MR. DATTU CHIDRI (DATTAKUMAR S/O SHRINIVASRAO CHIDRI), AGED ABOUT 59 YEAS, OCC: BUSINESS AND OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING NO. KA.32-5147 R/AT H.NO. (6-43 OLD) AND (6-40 NEW) GHADA GALLI, HUMNABAD, TQ. HUMNABAD DIST. BIDAR-585 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.S. SAJJANSHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PARWATI W/O LATE BABU, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. PINKI D/O LATE BABURAO, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT 3. SACHIN S/O LATE BABURAO, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT 4. PRIYANKA D/O LATE BABURAO, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT 5. PHULCHAND PAWAR S/O CHANDU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC: NIL Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2865 MFA No. 203508 of 2024 6. SUSALABAI PAWAR W/O PHULCHAND PAWAR AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD …RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30 (1) OF THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, IN E.C.A.NO.31/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION, BIDAR AND PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT BIDAR TO EXAMINE THE SAME. A) THE APPELLANT MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.11.2017, IN E.C.A.NO.31/2015, PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION, BIDAR AND PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT BIDAR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI) Though this appeal is filed challenging award dated 23.11.2017 passed in ECA no.31/2015, same is without complying of mandatory requirement of deposit of award amount. 2. Sri S.S.Sajjanshetty, learned counsel for appellant submits that above appeal was filed out of abundant caution as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2865 MFA No. 203508 of 2024 description of appellant would not match that of respondent against whom award was passed in impugned judgment. 3. After passing of impugned award, respondent had sought to execute it against appellant by filing application for amendment. It was submitted that appellant had not only opposed application but had also challenged order in separate proceedings. 4. It is submitted that appellant is not aggrieved by award. If, it is so, then appeal would not tenable. Hence, appeal is dismissed. 5. Registry is directed to return expired cheque. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE MSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 CT:SI