Karnataka High Court
Ms Deepika M vs M/S Mphasis Ltd on 6 April, 2015
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 06th DAY OF APRIL, 2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER
W.P.Nos.13264/2015 & 14025/2015 (GM-AC)
BETWEEN:
Ms.DEEPIKA.M,
D/O SRI C.MUNIKRISHNA,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
RESIDING AT FLAT NO.N-203
PURVA PANORAMA,
KALENA AGRAHARA,
BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
NEAR MEENAKSHI TEMPLE,
BANGALORE - 560 076. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SUBRAMANYA.S, ADV.)
AND
1 M/S.MPHASIS LTD.,
# 65/2, BAGMANE TECHNOLOGY
PARK, BYRASANDRA, CV RAMAN
NAGAR, BANGALORE -560 093
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2 SRI N.JAGADEESH,
S/O SRI NANJUNDAPPA,
RESIDING AT NO.198,
THUBARAHALLI, WHITEFIELD
MAIN ROAD, RAMAGONDANAHALLI
POST, BANGALORE -560 066
(DRIVER OF TATA SUMO VEHICLE
BEARING REGN. NO.KA-53-980)
3 SRI S.SIDDARAMA,
S/O SRI SIDDALINGAPPA,
2
ALL WELL ENGINEERING,
NO.1864/3, VIJYANAPURA,
BANGALORE.
ALSO HAVING PERMANENT
ADDRESS AT
NO.10, 3RD CROSS, 3RD MAIN,
NR LAYOUT, DOORVANINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 016
(DRIVER OF ASHOK LEYLAND GOODS/
CARRIAGE VEHICLE BEARING
REGN. NO.KA-10-9001).
4 SRI MUTHURAJAN,
S/O LATE SRI SENEGODA,
RESIDING AT A 637, MIG HOUSING
BOARD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR,
(REGISTERED OWNER OF ASHOK
LEYLAND GOODS/CARRIAGE,
VEHICLE BEARING REGN. NO.
KA-10-9001).
5 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
COMPANY LTD.,
NO.67/1, 1ST FLOOR, REDDY
COMPLEX, WHITEFIELD ROAD,
MAHADEVAPURA POST,
BANGALORE - 560 048
(REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRETOR/
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
(INSURER OF ASHOK LEYLAND GOODS/
CARRIAGE VEHICLE BEARING
REGN. NO.KA-10-9001). ... RESPONDENTS
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD.9.3.2015 ON IA NO.XIV AND XV IN
MVC NO.2027/2010 OF THE HON'BLE MOTOR VEHICLE CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE (SCCH-9 AND XXVI ACMM,
BANGALORE) AT ANNEX-G AND ETC.
3
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Admittedly during the pendency of these cases, the main matter has been disposed of by the Court. Therefore, these writ petitions have become infructuous. They are accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to raise all the contentions urged in these writ petitions in the appeal, which may be filed by her, if it is permitted in law. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE KLY/