Karnataka High Court
MFA/651/2023 of MR. DINAKAR SHETTY Vs SMT. SUNITHA DNYANESHWARA NALWADE on 17 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010047952023 NC: 2026:KHC:43957 MFA No. 651 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.651 OF 2023 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MR. DINAKAR SHETTY, S/O SHIVARAM SHETTY, AGED
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010047952023
NC: 2026:KHC:43957
MFA No. 651 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.651 OF 2023 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
MR. DINAKAR SHETTY,
S/O SHIVARAM SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT VADERHOBLI,
PADU MANE, KUNDAPURA.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. SUNITHA DNYANESHWARA NALWADE,
W/O VENKAT NIMBALKAR,
AGE MAJOR
R/O A/P, TQ-WASI,
DIST - SATARA,
WAI SATARA, MAHARASTRA.
2.
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANC CO., LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE,
ZENITH HOUSE,
KESHAVRAO KHADY MARG,
MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI - 400 034.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:24.05.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.736/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
Digitally
signed by
REKHA R
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010047952023
NC: 2026:KHC:43957
MFA No. 651 of 2023
COMPENSATION
AND
SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT
OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal by the claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation, with delay of 1630 days in filing the appeal. Though the matter was called twice, once in the morning session and in the afternoon session, none appeared on behalf of the appellant, though the counsel for the respondent No.2/insurer was present in the morning session. This clearly indicates that the appellant is not interested in continuing the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE DR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1 ct-vn