Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3584 (KAR)

SMT. LAKSHMAMMA v. SRI CHIKKEGOWDA

MFA/4017/2021 · 2026-04-09

P Sree Sudha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19853 MFA No. 4017 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4017 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O KATTIGENAHALLY KIBBANAHALLY HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK - 572 114. (OWNER OF THE TRACTOR AND TRAILER) …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BHANU PRAKASH H.V, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: SRI. CHIKKEGOWDA S/O SHIVANNA C/O CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, FARMER, BAREPALYA KIBBANAHALLI HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK - 572 114. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR T, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 401/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TIPTUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 2,47,360/- WITH INTEREST AT 7 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19853 MFA No. 4017 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the owner of the offending vehicle involved in the road traffic accident occurred on 01.11.2017, being aggrieved by the liability fastened on her. 2. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. It is noticed that, on 14.10.2025 also there was no representation on behalf of the appellant and the Court ordered to list the appeal on 10.11.2025 under the caption for "dismissal". Thereafter, matter was listed in the month of April, 2026 along with the connected matter and it appears even on that day, there was no representation for the appellant. As noted, today also there is no representation for the appellant. This shows that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, no purpose would be served in continuing the appeal and this Court deems fit to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE RS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50