- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35086 MFA No. 5284 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5284/2013 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. B. GOVINDARAYA @ GOVINDAPPA S/O BASANNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O KHANDENAHALLI VILLAGE HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B. GOVINDARAYA @ GOVINDAPPA - PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: 1. ABDUL SHAIKH S/O ABDUL KARIM, MAJOR R/O BANGARA GALLI, GOKAK TOWN, BELGAUM DISTRICT, BELGAUM -587 501. 2. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD P J EXTENSION DAVANAGERE -577 001. BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. U. POONACHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DATED 06.08.2015, APPEAL AGAINST R1 IS DISMISSED) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35086 MFA No. 5284 of 2013 THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PARYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN MVC NO.84/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND ADDITIONAL MACT, HIRIYUR AND FURTHER PLEASED TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.06.2012 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF'S, AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TO MEET THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Both learned counsel are absent. 2. This appeal is filed by injured claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. The records disclose that Court notice has been duly served upon the appellant on 25.10.2025. Despite service of notice, neither the appellant nor his learned counsel has appeared before this Court to prosecute the appeal. Even today, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35086 MFA No. 5284 of 2013 4. The conduct of the appellant clearly indicates that he is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and has failed to pursue the matter with due diligence. In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the appeal pending on the file of this Court. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3