IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM M.F.A.NO.7936 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN:
SMT. LAKKAMMA W/O LATE MYLARAPPA AGED 66 YEARS, R/O HEGGERE VILLAGE SRIRAMPURA HOBLI, HOSADURGA TALUK PETITIONER IS UN CONSCIOUS AND NOT ABLE TO SPEAK, SIGN AND UNDERSTAND AND REPRESENTED BY HER DAUGHTER AS A GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND OF PETITIONER BY NAME H M DEVARAJAMMA D/O LATE MYLARAPPA AGE 30 YEARS , R/O HEGGERE VILLAGE SRIRAMPURA HOBLI, HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA-577527.
(BY SRI. SURESH M.R., ADVOCATE) ....APPELLANT AND:
1. SRI SHIVANNA S/O GANGAMMA OWNER OF THE TRACTOR TRAILOR No.KA-44-T-5031 R/O YALANADU VILLAGE, HULIYUR HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR’s 1(a) SMT. SUNDANDAMMA W/O LATE. SHIVAPPA AGE 60 YEARS 1(b) PANCHAKSHARI S/O LATE SHIVAPPA AGED 35 YEARS 1(C) BASAVARAJ S/O LATE SHIVAPPA AGE 35 YEARS ALL ARE AGRICULTURIST R/O YALANADU VILLAGE HULIYAR HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572218.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., THILUVALLI BUILDING P.B.ROAD, NEAR ARUNA TALKIES DAVANAGERE-577002.
….RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DATE:02.02.2016, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:06.09.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.299/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ITINERARY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, HOSADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The claimant in MVC.No.299/2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hosadurga, has come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the injuries suffered in the accident where the claim petition was allowed awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.9,36,048/- which is sought to be enhanced in this proceedings.
2. In the meanwhile, the appellant is said to have been died. Since the appellant has died, question of considering this appeal for enhancement of compensation does not survive.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as the same has become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE CA