- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35883 RP No. 482 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA REVIEW PETITION NO. 482 OF 2024 BETWEEN: H.N. SUNITHA W O. B.A. MONAPPA R AT KANDANAKOLLI VILLAGE MADAPURA POST, SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU 571 251. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. CHITHARA B P, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KARUMBAIAH T.A.., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. K.N. GIRISH, MAJOR S/O. K.G. NANAIAH R/O NAKOOR SHIRANGALA KANBAIL, NUNTIKOPPA, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT 571 237. 2. SRI. K.P. MANJUNATHA MAJOR, S/O. K.P. PADMAIAH R/AT KANBAIL VILLAGE, SUNTIKOPPA SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT 571215. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. MADIKERI BRANCH, COLLEGE ROAD, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35883 RP No. 482 of 2024 MADIKERI THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. KRISHI BHAVAN, 5TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. REP. BY ITS MANAGER SMT. NAVAMANY …RESPONDENTS (R2 SD) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SEC. 151 OF THE CPC PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 22-9-2022 PASSED THIS HONBLE COURT IN MFA NO 6487/2012 IN THE ABOVE APPEAL AND RECALL THE SAME AS AGAINST THIS APPLICANT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL ORDER This Review petition is filed against the orders passed by this Court in MFA.No.6487/2012 dated 22.09.2022. The said appeal was preferred by the Insurance Company. In the said appeal, the review petitioner herein is the 3rd respondent but she has not contested the matter nor filed any relevant documents before this Court, hence, contemporary bench directed the claimants to recover the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35883 RP No. 482 of 2024 compensation from respondent No.*2/owner of the vehicle. Now the respondent No.3/review petitioner herein submits that she sold away the vehicle much prior to that and that she is not liable to pay the compensation. The review petitioner might have submitted the document and contested the matter before the contemporary Court, but failed to do so. As such, the review is not permissible. 2. Moreover, the present review is filed with the delay of 696 days. I.A.No.1/2024 is filed seeking to condone the said delay. The delay is inordinate and abnormal. The reasons stated for delay are neither sufficient nor convincing. Therefore, the delay application is dismissed. As such, review petition is also dismissed, as not maintainable. * The review petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- before this Court at the time of granting stay. The said amount shall be refunded to the petitioner. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE TIN, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 * Corrected and inserted as per Court order dtd: 12.09.2025.