- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36438 MFA No. 5236 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5236 OF 2013 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. S. MALLESH S/O SRI. V. SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.89 KATTARIGUPE MAIN ROAD OPPOSITE TO CHANDRODAYA TALKIES BANGALORE - 560 060. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. MALLESH, APPELLANT) AND: 1. SRI. NARAYANAPPA S/O SRI. VENKATESHAPPA R/O KUMBARA BEEDI ANKAPPA LAYOUT, MALUR KOLAR - 571 512. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.105A, 1ST FLOOR ,CEARS PLAZA 136, RESIDENCY ROAD BANGALORE - 560 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H S LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 19.08.2015, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36438 MFA No. 5236 of 2013 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.8.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO. 2462/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDL. JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE (SCCH.NO.16), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant expired, as such, Court notice was ordered to the appellant. In the postal notice it was endorsed that 'it is not served' and in the notice sent through the process server, it was endorsed that 'he is not residing in the said address'. 2. Later, notice was ordered to be issued to the counsel in the trial Court. But so far, the said notice is not issued by the registry. However, it is the case of injury filed for enhancement of compensation, in the year 2013 and the appellant is not residing in the said address and he has not turned up or engaged any other Advocate. As such, no - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36438 MFA No. 5236 of 2013 purpose is served in continuing the same. Hence, this Court finds it just and reasonable to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1 CT: BHK