- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21611 MFA No. 1096 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1096 OF 2016 (MV-D) BETWEEN: C.R. MOHANKUMARA S/O LATE RANGASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT 20/199, BANAJIGA STREET, CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH N D.,ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE NANJUNDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 2. RAVI S/O LATE NANJUNDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 3. N.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE NANJUNDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT YARAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HARADANAHALLI POST, CHAMARAJANAGAR TQ AND DISTRICT. 4. RAJESH P S/O PAPANAIKA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21611 MFA No. 1096 of 2016 R/AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGARA TQ AND DISTRICT. 5. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMP. LTD.,GIRISH COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, ADARSHA STREET, CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S. UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R5, SRI.H.V. BHANUPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3, VIDE ORDER DATED 13/07/2022, APPEAL AGAINST R4 IS DISMISSED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:07.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.347/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & MACT, CHAMARAJANAGAR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.7,76,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DEPOSIT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT None appears for the appellant. Earlier, several adjournments were granted, but there was no representation on behalf of the appellant. On 18.06.2025, this Court made it clear that, if there is no representation on behalf of the appellant on the next date of hearing, the appeal would be dismissed for non-prosecution. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21611 MFA No. 1096 of 2016 2. Today also, there is no representation in the morning, as well as in the afternoon session. It clearly indicates that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the case. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19