Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42185 (KAR)

SRI. RAJU, v. SRI. ISMAIL KHAN,

MFA/4223/2024 · 2025-11-12

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46640 MFA No. 4223 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4223 OF 2024(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. RAJU, S/O. RAMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT: DEVEGOWDANAHUNDI VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-570 010. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GIREESHA S. N., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. SRI. ISMAIL KHAN, S/O. MURTHUZA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NAGARLE VILLAGE, BILIKERE HOBLI, NANJANGUD TALUK-571 301. 2. SRI. PURUSHOTHAM D., S/O. DEVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, R/AT DOOR NO. 320, 1ST STAGE, ANANDA MARGA, SIDDHARTHANAGARA, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46640 MFA No. 4223 of 2024 MYSURU-570 011. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., PADMALAYA II FLOOR, NO.129, VINOBHA ROAD, SHIVARAMPET, MYSURU-570 001. REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE DISPENSED WITH; V/O. DATED 30.07.2025) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.09.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1143/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46640 MFA No. 4223 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT When the matter came up on 15.10.2025, as there was no representation on behalf of the appellant, this court had directed the matter to be listed under the caption for ‘dismissal’. 2. Today when the matter came up there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. It appears that the appellant is not interested to pursue the matter. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4