Dismissed

Manjunath S/O Halappa Medleri v. C.G. Hemavathi W/O H.C. Shivapa Nayakaja

Karnataka HC13 Nov 2018MFA/101952/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge dismissed both the application to condone a delay of 1846 days in filing an appeal under Section 173(1) of the MV Act and the subsequent appeal. The court held that the affidavit failed to establish sufficient grounds for condonation.

What did the court decide?

Application to condone delay dismissed; consequent appeal also dismissed.

Manjunath S/O Halappa Medleri Vs C.G. Hemavathi W/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

¶5

M.F.A.No.101952/2015 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

MANJUNATH, S/O HALAPPA MEDLERI AGE:28 YEARS, OCC. FOOD GRAIN BUSINESS R/O MAKANUR VILLAGE, TQ. RANEBENNUR DIST. HAVERI

¶8

... APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. PATIL M H., ADVOCATE )

¶10

AND

¶11

C.G. HEMAVATHI, W/O H.C. SHIVAPA NAYAKAJA AGE: MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS R/O ARAKERE POST: JAVAGAL HOBALI ARASIKERE TALUKA, DIST. HASAN

¶12

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER

¶13

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMAPNY LTD., ENKAY COMPLEX, KEESHWAPUR HUBBALLI

¶14

... RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY R-1 SERVED, SMT.ARUNA DESHPANDE, ADV. FOR R2)

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.03.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.221/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK JUDGE, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶17

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and respondents on IA No.1/2015. The said application has been filed under Sec.5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 1846 days in preferring the appeal. The said application is accompanied with the affidavit of the appellant. In the said affidavit it has been stated that he stay in a remote village and his counsel has dropped a letter about the judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal and the said letter was not delivered to him. Later when he approached his council in the second week of June-2015 to enquire about the status of the case, he informed about the less compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶21

He further stated that he is not able to carry out avocation and he was not in a position to come to Dharwad and engage counsel to prefer the appeal and as such he prays to condone the delay. The said

¶22

¶23

submission is objected today by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶24

I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the affidavit and petition. As could be seen from the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner has sustained contusion over the left hand back side, contusion over the right side chest and by the other records it shows that fracture of 4^th and 5^th metatarsal of left hand, fracture of 5^th and 7^th ribs right side laterally. Fracture of 7^th , 9^th and 10^th rib right side. The said injuries though of grievous in nature but they are not come in the way of ascertaining the disability. Even though, the petitioner has filed affidavit to condone the delay, no good grounds has been made out to condone the delay. There is an inordinate delay of 1846 days in preferring the appeal. It is well established principle of Law that each days delay has to be explained properly.

¶25

¶26

In the light of discussion, I pass the following

¶27

ORDER

¶28

IA No.1/2015 is dismissed and consequently, the

¶29

appeal is also dismissed.

¶30

SD/JUDGE

¶31

HMB

Manjunath S/O Halappa Medleri v. C.G. Hemavathi W/O H.C. Shivapa Nayakaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjunath S/O Halappa Medleri v. C.G. Hemavathi W/O H.C. Shivapa Nayakaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri.Shrishail S/O Shivamurtayya Dhupadalmath Vs Shri.Mahaning S/O Appanna Bangennavar

Ashwini Trading Company Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S. Go World Office Vs the University of Agricultural Sciences

Shri. Rajesh Vs Smt. Sneha

The Managing Director Vs Kiran Kumar H.B

Smt Kavita @ Latha W/O T. Virupaksha Reddi Vs T. Virupaksha Reddi