IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REVIEW PETITION NO.183 OF 2014 IN MFA.NO.11279 OF 2012 (MV) BETWEEN:
AKMAL BASHA T. S/O AHMED PASHA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, BUSINESSMEN, SALAMATH HARDWARE, BANGALORE, R/O BYPASS ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201.
(BY SRI M.RAVINDRANATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. PERVEEZ, S/O GHOUSE SHARIEFF, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, DRIVER OF LORRY, R/O DOUBLE ROAD, 1ST CROSS, SAVARKAR NAGAR, ...PETITIONER SHIVAMOGGA.
FDL NO.593/86-87, RDL-II 645/2010-11, VALID DATED 15.06.2013 2. CHAND BASHA S/O ABDUL SATTAR, AGE: MAJOR, OWNER OF THE LORRY, R/O 1ST MAIN ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., MALLAPPA COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, SHIVAMOGGA – 577201 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, POLICY NO.67060031100100007443 VALIDITY 09/10/2010 TO 08/10/2011.
...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.NARAYANAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
V/O DATED 15.03.2018 NOTICE TO RI HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 24/01/2014 PASSED IN MFA NO.11279/2012 (MV), ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The claimant in MVC.No.506/2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shivamogga, has come up in this review petition.
2. The material on record would indicate that the claim petition which was filed by the review petitioner came to be dismissed by judgment and award dated 24.08.2012 in MVC.No.506/2011 on the file of the First Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, MACT-VI at Shivamogga, which was the subject matter of challenge in MFA.No.11279/2012 on the file of co-ordinate Bench of this Court which came to be dismissed on merits by judgment dated 24.01.2014. Thereafter, the present review petition is filed.
3. Perused the judgment impugned and also the grounds urged in the review petition. On going through the same, it is clearly seen that no grounds are made out to consider review of the judgment dated 24.01.2014 passed in the aforesaid appeal. Therefore, the review petition is hereby dismissed as the same does not merit consideration. The dismissal of the review petition would not take away the right of the petitioner to challenge the judgment and award in MFA.No.11279/2012 in appeal before the appropriate forum.
With such observation, this review petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE CA