Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sree Shakti Filling Station, vs Sri Joseph Brutus on 4 June, 2012

Author: L.Narayana Swamy

Bench: L. Narayana Swamy

                           1


                          --



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

          DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JUNE 2012

                       BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY

                MFA NO.11011/2011 (MV)


BETWEEN:

SREE SHAKTI FILLING STATION
IOC DEALER, NO.67, DODDAKALLASANDRA,
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 062
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SRI. V. PURUSHOTHAMA
(OWNER OF VEHICLE TANKER KA-25-7146)

                                         ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI: R.L. GOWDA AND ASSOCIATES, ADV.)


AND

1.    SRI. JOSEPH BRUTUS,
      S/O. DHARMARAJ,
      AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
      RESIDING AT NO.6,
      SHANKARAPPA BUILDING,
      SIDDAPURA OPP. SHELL PETROL BUK,
      BANGALORE-560 066.
                                2


                               --


2.   THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
     NO.65, ESWARI COMPLEX,
     DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
     RAJAJINAGAR,
     BANGALORE - 560 021.
     (POLICY NO.670303/31/08/01/0010751
     VALID FROM 03.01.2009 TO 26.12.2009)

                                            ... RESPONDENTS


     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 18.02.2011 PASSED
IN MVC NO.355/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE XV
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MEMBER, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MAYO HALL UNIT,
BANGALORE,      AWARDING    A   COMPENSATION     OF
RS.1,58,593/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE
OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT.


      THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A. THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                       JUDGMENT

The appellant remained absent before the Tribunal. The liability is fastened on the owner of the vehicle. Hence this appeal is filed by the owner seeking to fix the liability on the insurance company.

2. When the appellant was duly served he failed to avail the opportunity, thereby he failed to respect the court 3

--

notice. Hence he cannot be permitted to agitate before the Court.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE SNC