Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60102 (KAR)

SANGITA W/O RAMESH BASAPUR v. VISHNU S/O MARUTI SAWANT

MFA/100789/2015 · 2025-11-05

Chillakur Sumalatha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15075 MFA No. 100789 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100789 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. SANGITA W/O. RAMESH BASAPUR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O: KURANKUR CHAWL SANKESHWAR TQ: HUKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. KUSHAL V. BOLMAL AND SRI. NAVEEN R. MELINAMANI, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SHRI VISHNU S/O. MARUTI SAWANT, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: BANDEKARWADA, POST: NILALWADE, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI (OWNER). 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE CLUB ROAD, BELGAUM. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. S.V. YAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.08.2014 PASSED BY IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE & MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V, BELGAUM IN M.V.C. NO.2138/2013 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15075 MFA No. 100789 of 2015 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY, ORDER WAS PASSED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) No representation on the appellant’s side on call. 2. Sri.S.V.Yaji, learned counsel for respondent No.2 appears through video conference. 3. There was no representation on the appellant’s side even on 29.10.2025. Though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, yet there is no representation. Therefore, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22