* HLGHCOUR'LOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellants Claimants Misc. Appeal (0 PR No. 2171of2011 HfsrCc) l03'2-|ll 1. Smt. Sushila Bai, aged 38 years, widow of late Umesh Kumar Sahu 2. Ku. Premalata @ Lucky, aged 19 years, d/o of late Umesh Kumar Sahu 3. Ku. Suruchi Sahu, aged 16 years, d/o of late Umesh Kumar Sahu 4. RahulSahu, aged about 14 years, son of late Umesh Kumar Sahu Respondents No. 3 and 4 are minors through their natural guardian Smt. Sushila Bai, widow of late Umesh Kumar Sahu, resident of Jorapara, near Hanuman Temple, near Sindhi School, tehsil and district Raipur C.G. VERSUS Respondents Raj Kumar, son of Parvej Singh, aged about 22 years, No.C.G.- 07/C/7765, through Sarabjeet Singh, son of S. Niranjan Singh, Proprietor Devendra Road Lines, Transport Nagar, Hathkhod, Bhilai, tehsil and district Durg C.G. Sarabjeet Singh, son of Niranjan Singh, Proprietor Devendra Road Lines, Transport Nagar, Hathkhod, resident of MIG-11/47, MHBO, Bhilai, tehsil and district Durg C.G. Manager, ICICI Lombard Insurance Company Limited, Lalganga Shopping Mall complex, GE Road, AC.PR No. 2171 of 2011 Raipur, tehsil and district Raipur, Policy No.3003/56761380/00/00, limitation from 7.5.2009 to 6.5.2009 4. Peela Bai, widow of Tiharuram Sahu, aged 75 years, resident of Jorapara, near Hanuman Temple, near Sindhi School, tehsil and district Raipur C.G. Memo of appeal under Seclion 1 73 of MotorVehicle Act Present: None for the appellants. ORDER >th (27InSeptember,2011) The following order of the Couri: was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. None for the appellants. 2) As there is no representation on behalf of the appellants, we are left with no other option, but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. 3) The appeal, therefore, is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- Chief Justice RJ^. Chandrakar Judge subbu