- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13984 MFA No. 24084 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24084 OF 2013 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI DEELIP S/O. BHIMASHI SALUNKE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: FABRICATOR, R/O. NH-4 ROAD PUNNASWAMY GOUDAR CHAWL, BELGAUM. 2. SMT. CHANDA W/O. DEELIP SALUNKE, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NH-4 ROAD PUNNASWAMY GOUDAR CHAWL, BELGAUM. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI MOHAMMED NOOR S/O. MOHAMMED BASHEER, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS MAN, R/O. NO.4 MAVALI TANK BUND ROAD, JOURNALIST COLONY, J.C. ROAD, BANGALORE. ND MARG BALLARD ESTATE MUMBAI-400001. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13984 MFA No. 24084 of 2013 (OWNER OF ASHOK LEYLAND TRUCK NO. KA46/869) 2. THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE AT BANGALORE HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT 19, RELIANCE CENTRE WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG BALLARD ESTATE MUMBAI-400001 (INSURER OF ASHOK LEYLAND TRUCK NO.KA46/869) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1-DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD BY ENHANCING COMPENSATION IN M.V.C.NO.618/2011 DATED 08.05.2012 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER FAST TRACK III-COURT AND MACT, BELAGUM UNDER ALL PERMISSIBLE HEADS. [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13984 MFA No. 24084 of 2013 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Miss.Shaila Bellikatti learned counsel for appellants submits that she has no instructions from the appellants. She further states that the appellants appear to have no interest to pursue the appeal. Learned counsel thereby seeks to pass necessary orders. 2. In the light of the submission thus made by the learned counsel for the appellants and as the appellants did not choose to pursue the matter since 2013, this Court is of the view that the appeal need not be carried forward through adjournments. 3. Therefore, the appeal stands dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20