eCourtsIndia

Sri Dawood S/O Ameen Sab Makandar vs. Ibrahim S/O Mumtazali Mulla

Final Order
Court:High Court of Karnataka (Gulbarga Bench)
Judge:Hon'ble B.Sreenivase Gowda
Case Status:Unknown Status
Order Date:2 Sept 2015
CNR:KAHC030008932014

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Disposed

Before:

Hon'ble B.Sreenivase Gowda

Listed On:

2 Sept 2015

Order Text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA

MFA.CROB. No.200028/2014 (WC) IN MFA No.31939/2009

Between:

Sri Dawood S/o Ameen Sab Makandar Age: 32 years, Occ: Driver, R/o: Jorapur Pet. Bijapur – 586 101.

…Cross Objector

(By Sri P.S. Patil, Advocate - Absent)

And:

    1. Ibrahim S/o Mumtazali Mulla Age: Major, Occ: Business, R/o: Mangsooli, Tq. Atani, Dist: Belgaom – 586 101.
    1. The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co.Ltd., Bijapur, Now Represented by: Regional Office, Unity Building Annexe, P. Kalinga Rao Road,

Bangalore – 560 027, By its Manager.

…Respondents

This MFA CROB is filed under order 41 rule 22 of CPC., praying against the Judgment and order dated 31.07.2009 passed in WCA/SR/No.158/2007 on the file of the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Sub-Division No.1 Bijapur at Bijapur, Partly allowing the claim petition and seeking enhancement of compensation.

This MFA.CROB coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

This MFA.Crob was filed on 30.04.2014. As the cross objector failed to comply with the office objections within six weeks' time permitted in law, the appeal came to be listed before the Court for orders on 12.01.2015 regarding non-compliance of office objections, on which day, the cross objector was granted two weeks' time to comply with the office objections. Again on 7.7.2015, he was granted three weeks' time to comply with the office objections. Till today, neither the office objections are

complied with nor there is representation for the cross objector.

  1. The above facts would go to show that the cross objector is not evincing interest in prosecuting the appeal.

  2. Hence, the MFA.CROB is dismissed for noncompliance of office objections and for non-prosecution.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sk/-

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order