IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3709/2019(ECA) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SUJATHA W/O LATE MYLARI RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE, 2 . ABHISHEK S/O LATE MYLARI RAO AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, 3 . KUM. SANGEETHA D/O LATE MYLARI RAO AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, (APPELLANTS 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER SMT. SUJATHA, 1ST APPELLANT) 4 . SMT. CHANDRAMMA W/O NINGOJI RAO, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE 5 . SRI NINGOJI RAO S/O KHANDOJI RAO AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE (ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF KANIVEBILICHI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANGERE DISTRICT.) ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI SAMEER S. N., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND:
1. SRI G. MANJUNATHA S/O GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING NO.KA-18-D-7677 R/O GANTANAKAVIE VILLAGE CHICKAMAGALORE DISTRICT, TARIKERE TALUK, PRESENT ADDRESS:
SADATH COLONY, T. K. ROAD BHADRAVATHI SHIVAMOGGA DIST.
2. R. ESHWAR S/O RANGANATH, MAJOR, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING No.KA-18-D-7677 R/O GANDHINAGAR, 2ND CROSS, BHADRAVATHI, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
3. NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., VIDHYARTHI BHAVAN, C.J. HOSPITAL ROAD, DAVANAGERE.
…RESPONDENTS **** THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN ECA No.24/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAGIRI, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING UP FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING.
J U D G M E N T This Court by the order dated 16.10.2019, granted a week’s time for compliance of office objections, failing which the Miscellaneous First Appeal would be dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.
2. Today, the matter is listed for dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of office objections.
3. Case called thrice. None appeared for the appellants nor complied office objections inspite of last chance provided. It clearly indicates that the appellants are not interested in complying the order dated 16.10.2019. Therefore, this Court has no option except to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance of the office objections.
Accordingly, the present Miscellaneous First Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-