Karnataka High Court
The Union Of India vs Smt. Nagavva on 18 February, 2020
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5801 OF 2013 (RCT)
BETWEEN:
THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER,
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
HUBLI-580020.
... APPELLANT
(BY SMT.H.C.KAVITHA, ADVOCATE-ABSENT)
AND:
1. SMT. NAGAVVA
W/O TIRAKAPPA DODDAMANI,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O KUDARIHAL,
RANEBENNUR TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT,
PIN CODE - 581104
2. SMT. PUTTAVVA
W/O NAGAPPA KUNTAGOUDAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O RAHUNKATI,
RANEBENNUR TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT,
PIN CODE - 581104
-2-
3. SRI BEERAPPA
S/O BASAPPA KICHADI,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE
RANEGENNUR TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT.
PIN CODE - 581104
4. SMT. PARAVVA
W/O SANNINGAPPA KAIDALI,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/O KAKOL,
RANEBENNUR TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-581104
5. SMT.SHANTAVVA
W/O PRABHU DITOOR,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
RANEBENNUR TALUK,
HAVERI DISTRICT
PIN CODE - 581104
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M.R.HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE;
VIDE ORDER DATED 29.05.2018 APPEAL ABATED AS
AGAINST R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 23(1) OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2012 PASSED IN
OA II U 99/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, BENGALURU, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.4,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER
AND @ 9% FROM THE DATE OF ORDER TILL PAYMENT.
-3-
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
None appears for the appellant.
2. None appeared for the appellant on the previous hearing date and therefore, the appeal was directed to be listed today subject to the condition that if none appears for the appellant, the appeal could be dismissed for default.
3. It is obvious that the concerned is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for default.
SD/-
JUDGE KPS