H K BASAVARAJ v. MUNIYAPPA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
objections, failing which appeal stands dismissed without reference to
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 173(1)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE 560 003 RAMESH AGED 24 YEARS S/O SIDDARAMAPPA DRIVER, R/O RAMAJJANAHALLY, MADADAKERE POST, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT THBASAVARAJ MAJOR, S/O T K HANUMATHAGOWDA R/O VINAYAKA BADAVANE, HOSADURGA, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT I MFA filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment…
Judgment
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1031 OF 2011 APPELLANT H K BASAVARAJ AGED 44 YEARS S/0 KENCHAPPA SECRETARY, K S S VIDYA SAMSTHE, NEAR DURGAMBIKA HIGH SCHOOL, SARASWATHINAGAR, DAVANAGERE (BY SfflLVIJAYALAKSHMI, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENTS
MUNIYAPPA AGED 28 YEARS S/O GANGA MUTHAIAH DRIVER, R/O THIGALARAPALYA, THIPPASAN DRA POST, MAGADI TALU K, BANGALORE DISTRICT LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY MAJOR, S/O NOT KNOWN OWNER, R/O NO.27, 9’ CROSS, 1N BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD NO.339, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR 11TH CROSS Hh Ci MFA.NO.1031/2011 -:2:-
Operative part
SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE 560 003 RAMESH AGED 24 YEARS S/O SIDDARAMAPPA DRIVER, R/O RAMAJJANAHALLY, MADADAKERE POST, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT THBASAVARAJ MAJOR, S/O T K HANUMATHAGOWDA R/O VINAYAKA BADAVANE, HOSADURGA, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT I MFA filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award Dated: 202010 passed in MVC.No.1030/2006 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, VI Additional Mact, Davangere, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation. This MFA coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following: MFA,NO.1O31/2O1 1 -:3:- ORDER Appellant is granted six weeks time finally to comply with office objections, failing which appeal stands dismissed without reference to Bench and application, if any to be made for recalling, will be entertained only on payment of cost of Rs. 1 ,OOO/ to High Court Legal Service Committee. TBy :MG RBy: I— CBy:p Sd/ JUDGE.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: objections, failing which appeal stands dismissed without reference to
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 173(1).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.