THE MANAGING DIRECTOR v. MOHAMMED RAFIQ S/O ABDUL AZIZ SAB SHAIKH
CRP/100028/2023 · 2026-01-21
K Manmadha Rao
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 52538 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 52538 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:659 CRP No. 100028 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 100028 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MODERN ROAD MAKERS PVT. LTD., (REP. BY SRI GURANNA S. BHARADI) UNIVERSAL BUSINESS PARK, CHANDIVALI, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400072. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH SHENOY P, ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
MOHAMMED RAFIQ S/O ABDUL AZIZ SAB SHAIKH AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR, SRIRAM COLONY, BANAVASI ROAD, SIRSI-581401.
2.
THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE, UNIT NO.401, IV FLOOR, SANGAM COMPLEX, ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, DR. CHARAT SINGH COLONY, S.B.SIGH COLONY, J.B.NAGAR, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400059. …RESPONDENTS (R1-HELD SUFFICIENT; R2-SERVED)
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO ISSUE ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE ORDER 20.12.2022 PASSED IN ECA NO.01/2018 BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND LABOUR COMMISSIONER AT HONNAVARA ON IA FILED SEEKING REJECTION OF PLAINT UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11 F CPC VIDE ANNEXURE-A & ETC.
THIS CRP COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2026.01.22 11:26:39 +0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:659 CRP No. 100028 of 2023
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO)
1. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. It appears that the petitioner has not complied with the office objection raised by the registry on I.A.
3. Since the matter is of the year 2023, on earlier occasion also the petitioner has not appeared.
4. Today also the petitioner has not appeared.
5. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non- compliance of office objection.
Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE
KGK, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11