- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6661 MFA No. 2278 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2278 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI GOVINDANAYAKA S/O HANUMANTHANAYAKA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO. 119, T KATURU VILLAGE, JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK (OWNER KA-09-C-2410) …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BHANU PRAKASH H V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PUTTASWAMY S/O LATE KARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT DOOR NO. 707, 13TH CROSS, JANATHANAGAR MYSURU. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BALLAL CIRCLE, MYSURU (INSURER- KA-09-C-2410) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.C.VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6661 MFA No. 2278 of 2024 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1310/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT, MYSURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,71,500/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. [[ THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Owner of the vehicle preferred this appeal as the liability is fastened against him by the Tribunal for non filing of driving licence. He preferred an appeal against the award of the Tribunal in MVC No.1310/2017 dated 27.12.2019 with the delay of 744 days. He filed an application in I.A.No.1/2024 to condone the delay of 744 days. 2. The reasons stated by the petitioner for the delay is that notice was served upon him and he represented through his counsel, but due to the health issues and financial loss, COVID pandemic and lockdown, he could not contact his counsel and thus, award was passed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6661 MFA No. 2278 of 2024 against him and execution petition was also filed in E.P.No.13/2021. Notice was served upon him. He misplaced the notice. Recently, warrant was issued against him. Then, he contacted his counsel and he advised him to file an appeal, as such, there is delay of 744 days. 3. Counsel for the respondents has filed objections and mainly contended that though he appeared before the Trial Court, he has not produced the driving licence. Thus, he requested the Court to dismiss the application. 4. The petitioner/appellant is owner of the vehicle. After service of notice by the Tribunal, he appeared before the Court, But he did not file any objection statement and he has not filed the copy of the driving licence before the Tribunal and the liability was fastened against him in an order dated 27.12.2019. It was said that he alone is liable to pay the compensation. Even then, he kept quiet till the service of notice in execution petition and then filed an appeal with inordinate delay of more than two years and the reasons stated by him are neither convincing nor - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6661 MFA No. 2278 of 2024 satisfactory. He knows very well about the accident, but he could not represent properly before the Tribunal and he cannot take advantage of his own mistake. Therefore, there are no merits in I.A.No.1/2024 and accordingly, the same is dismissed. 5. In view of dismissal of I.A.No.1/2024, I.A.No.1/2025 is also dismissed and MFA No.2278/2024 is also dismissed. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20