Sri.M.U.Poonacha., learned counsel for the appellant has appeared through video conferencing.

Smt.Lakshmi., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Prasanna.V.R., for respondent No.1 has appeared in person.

2. Notice to the respondents was ordered on 19.04.2013. A perusal of the daily order sheet depicts that vide order dated:26.03.2018 notice to respondent No.2 is held sufficient. He has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as party in person.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status and rankings before the Tribunal.

4. The brief facts are these:

In the claim petition it is stated that on the 18th day of July 2007 at about 1:00 pm., the claimant and her husband Puttaswamy were walking near Reliance Petrol Bunk at Thattekere after alighting from a Tempo at Channarayapatna by-pass. At that time, a Tanker lorry bearing Registration No.KA-03-A-2273 came from Petrol bunk side in a rash and negligent manner and hit her. Due to the impact, she fell and sustained injuries. Contending that she is entitled for compensation, the claimant filed claim petition.

In response to the notice, the first respondent remained absen