- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30723 MFA No. 8237 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 8236 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8237/2019 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8236/2019 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 8237/2019: BETWEEN: SMT PARVATHAMMA, W/O MALLESHA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT MADABARU VILLAGE, PALYA HOBLI, ALURU TALUK, HASSAN DIST-57 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHIJITH M., ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C. HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN (OWNER OF K.S.R.T.C. BUS BEARING REG NO.KA-13-F-1642) …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NAGARAJA K., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.10.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1001/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30723 MFA No. 8237 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 8236 of 2019 THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 8236/2019: BETWEEN: SRI ASAR PASHA, S/O. SAABULAL, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT DODDIBEEDHI, ALURU TOWN AND TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-57 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHIJITH M., ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN,(OWNER OF KSRTC BUS BEARING REG. NO. KA-13-F-1642) ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G LAKSHMEESH RAO., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:13.10.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1232/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30723 MFA No. 8237 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 8236 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT IN MFA.NO.8236.2019: An application is filed to condone the delay of 625 days. Claimant is injured. He stated that, he suffered from severe pain and he could not able to walk freely and as such, he could not contact the Advocate and requested his friend to contact the Advocate and thus, there is a delay of 90 days in filing the objections by the KSRTC. 2. It is contended that the reason for the abnormal delay of 450 days is vague and is liable to be rejected. 3. Both of them have not stated the actual period of delay properly. However, on perusal of the injury certificate shows that, he sustained seven simple injuries and the reasons stated by him is that, he could not walk as such, he could not contact the Advocate. He could have contacted the counsel through mobile phone and moreover, the injuries are not grievous. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30723 MFA No. 8237 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 8236 of 2019 4. Therefore, the reason for abnormal delay of 625 days is neither convincing nor satisfactory. Therefore, appeal is devoid of merits and is dismissed. 5. In view of the dismissal of I.A.No.1/2019, MFA.No.8237/2019 is also 'dismissed'. IN MFA.No.8237/2019: I.A.No.1/2019 to condone the delay of 625 days connected matter MFA.No.8236/2019. Objections are filed by the learned counsel for KSRTC. Both the matters are 'dismissed'. SD/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20