- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16027 MFA No. 100830 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100830 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: DHARAMENDRAKUMAR S/O. JUGARAJA AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: PROVISIONAL STORE BUSINESS, R/O: HUDCO COLONY, KOPPAL, TQ & DIST: KOPPAL. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. U.G. KATTIMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MEHABOOBSAB S/O. PEERSAB ULLAGADDI, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER & MECHANIC R/O: KUMBAR ONI, KOPPAL, TQ & DIST: KOPPAL. 2. MAHAMED RAFEEQUE S/O. REHAMAN SHARIF, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. NEAR SHAIK BHAVI, SALAR JUNG ROAD, KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16027 MFA No. 100830 of 2015 (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA 37/Q-1742) 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., UMA MAHESHWARA BUILDING, STATION ROAD, HOSPETE, BALLARI. (INSURER OF VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA 37/Q-1742) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 & R2 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26/9/2014 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, KOPPAL IN MVC NO.24/2014 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION OF RS.14,00,000/- AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE CLAIMS TRIBUNAL BY ENHANCING THE AWARDED COMPENSATION; THE COST OF THIS APPEAL BE AWARDED TO THE APPELLANT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY, ORDER WAS PASSED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16027 MFA No. 100830 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) No representation on appellant’s side on call. Sri. M. K. Soudagar, learned counsel for respondent No.3 is present. There was no representation on appellant’s side even on 30.10.2025 and 10.11.2025. Though the matter is listed on this day under the caption ‘for Dismissal’, yet there is no representation. These facts reveal that appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Therefore the appeal stands dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14