Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5162 (KAR)

VIJAY KUMAR v. ANIL

MFA/21349/2013 · 2025-10-08

Geetha K B, S G Pandit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - MFA No. 21349 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 22728 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 21349 OF 2013 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22728 OF 2013 (MV-D) IN M.F.A. NO. 21349/2013: BETWEEN: 1. VIJAY KUMAR S/O SHIVAYOGAPPA SHABADI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. SACHIN S/O SHIVAYOGAPPA SHABADI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: BAGALKOT, DIST.: BAGALKOT. - APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ANIL S/O BASAPPA HALASUR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: PLOT NO.422, SECTOR NO.3, SHIVBASAVA NAGAR, BELGAUM. 2. GOPAL S/O YALLAPPA KAPALESHWARI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: KHANGRALI, BELGAUM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BANGALORE DIVISIONAL OFFICER NO.1, III FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, 72, MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE. - RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R3, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT, John Doe Digitally signed by John Doe Location: DHARWAD Date: 2023.03.13 16:21:13 - 0700 - 2 - MFA No. 21349 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 22728 of 2013 R1 IS DECEASED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.01.2013 PASSED IN MVC.NO.52/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER M.A.C.T.-III BAGALKOT, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED FOR COMPENSATION U/SEC.166 OF MV ACT & ETC. IN M.F.A.NO. 22728/2013 BETWEEN: 1. VIJAY KUMAR S/O SHIVAYOGAPPA SHABADI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. SACHIN S/O SHIVAYOGAPPA SHABADI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: BAGALKOT, DIST.: BAGALKOT. - APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ANIL S/O BASAPPA HALASUR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: PLOT NO.422, SECTOR NO.3, SHIVBASAVA NAGAR, BELGAUM. 2. GOPAL S/O YALLAPPA KAPALESHWARI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: KHANGRALI, BELGAUM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BANGALORE DIVISIONAL OFFICER NO.1, III FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, 72, MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE. - RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R3, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT, R1 IS DECEASED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.01.2013 PASSED IN MVC.NO.53/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER M.A.C.T.-III BAGALKOT, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED FOR COMPENSATION U/SEC.166 OF MV ACT & ETC. - 3 - MFA No. 21349 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 22728 of 2013 THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL): Although leave was granted by this Court by order dated 15.07.2022 to file a fresh application to bring the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.1 on record while seeking condonation of delay and for that purpose two weeks were granted, no such application is filed. 2. Moreover, on perusal of the order sheet, we find that earlier I.A. No. 1/2020 was filed at the hands of the appellants seeking to bring the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.1 on record while seeking condonation of delay of 2288 days in filing the application. On consideration, the application was rejected by order dated 06.10.2020. 3. In the considered opinion of this Court, the appellants could not have filed one more application on the same cause of action, since no such leave was granted by this Court. In that view of the matter, no useful purpose would be served in keeping these appeals alive, since the original claim petitions filed at the hands of the appellants was rejected by the MACT. The moment the - 4 - MFA No. 21349 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 22728 of 2013 application seeking leave of the Court to bring the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.1, who was the owner of the offending vehicle was rejected by order dated 06.10.2020, the appeals also should have been dismissed. Accordingly, the appeals stand dismissed, for the reasons stated hereinabove. Pending IAs, if any, also stand disposed off. SD JUDGE SD JUDGE BVV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14