Dismissed¶¶33

Sri Puttamadaiah v. Zulfikar Ahmed

Karnataka HC17 Sept 2025MFA/905/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court MFA No.905/2016 (MV-I) dismissed for non-prosecution; enhancement of motor vehicle accident compensation under Section 173(1) Motor Vehicles Act 1988; MVC No.444/2012, II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & Addl. MACT Mandya; Tribunal award Rs.1,16,000/- against claim of Rs.5,26,000/-; appellant Puttamadaiah; respondents Zulfikar Ahmed and Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.; appellant's counsel absent on 08.09.2025 and 17.09.2025; decided 17.09.2025 by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice P Sree Sudha.

What did the court decide?

None; appeal dismissed for non-prosecution, no enhancement of compensation granted. ¶¶33

Sri Puttamadaiah Vs Zulfikar Ahmed — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:37495 MFA No. 905 of 2016

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 905 OF 2016 (MV-I)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. PUTTAMADAIAH S/O LATE KEMPANANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, CHANDAGALU VILLAGE, DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DIST - 571 405

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. JAGADEESH V.N, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶12

AND:

¶13

ZULFIKAR AHMED S/O ABDUL WAHAB,

¶14

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.8/1 (OLD NO.250/8), 1TH MAIN, 13TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶16

MANAGING DIRECTOR ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUNDARAM TOWER, 46TH WHITES ROAD, RAYAPETTAH, CHENNAI - 600 014.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. H. MUJTABA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:37495 MFA No. 905 of 2016

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.444/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE C/c ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE ADDITIONAL MACT, MANDYA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶22

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is present.

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the common judgment and award dated 16.11.2015 passed in MVC No.444/2012, by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & Addl. MACT, Mandya (hereinafter referred has 'Tribunal' for short).

¶27

The petitioner/injured claimant had filed application before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.5,26,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:37495 MFA No. 905 of 2016

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.1,16,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization.

¶31

Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal was preferred on 01.02.2016. Though learned counsels for respondent Nos.1 & 2 were present on 08.09.2025, but the learned counsel for the appellant did not turn-up. Accordingly, the matter was listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today, learned counsel for the appellant is not present before this Court.

¶32

Hence, the appellant has not pursued the matter with due diligence, no purpose would be served in continuing this appeal.

¶33

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶34

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶35

TMP/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23 CT: BHK

Sri Puttamadaiah v. Zulfikar Ahmed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Puttamadaiah v. Zulfikar Ahmed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Peter Simon D'Souza Vs Sri Sadananda Chatra

Rathnakara Kulal Vs Shekar Kulal

The United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Ningamma Alias Lingamma

Mr Syed Raffiq Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

The Managing Director Vs Mallikarjunaswamy @ Mallu

Sri N G Chandrashekar Vs Arun Kumar @ Arun