✦ Karnataka High Court

DIVISIONAL MANAGER v. MOSIN BANU

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as

Provisions considered

Judgment

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH & SMT. P.V. KALPANA, MEMBER M.F.A.No.9979/2018(MV) (Lok Adalat No.3492/2024) BETWEEN DIVISIONAL MANAGER M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD NO.4/5, 3RD FLOOR, S V ARCADE BILEKAHALLI MAIN ROAD OFF BANNERUGHATTA ROAD IIMB POST BANGALORE-560076 (BY SRI B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) ...APPELLANT AND 1 . MOSIN BANU W/O LATE SYED USMAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 2 . SUMAYYA BANU D/O LATE SYED USMAN 2 AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS 3 . FIZA BANU S/O LATE SYED USMAN AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS 4 . SYED REHAN S/O LATE SYED USMAN AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS AND HENCE, REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN AND 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN ALL ARE R/O GANESHA NAGARA 3RD CROSS, SAGAR SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201 5 . LOKESHANAIKA AGED ABPIT 28 YEARS R/A CHIKKURU B TANDYA KASABA HOBLI ARASIKERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 6 . GOPAL NAIK S/O DENYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O HALEKALLANAIKANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI ARASIKERE DAVANAGERE DISTRICT ….RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 29/08/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.1081/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AND ADDITIONAL MACT-10, SAGAR AND ETC. 3 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED. CONCILIATION ORDER The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a memo for withdrawal of the appeal as not pressed. In view of the said memo, the learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER SN

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as

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 treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments