-•MAe:..l&^.e. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISf^ARH AT BILASPUR DtVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. M.A. (0 PR No. 1492 of2010 Appellant Non-applicant No.3 Satrughan Chakradhari S/o. Teliram Chakradhari, aged about 50 years, R/o. Tlkra Para Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) (Registered owner of tractor No. C.G.04.ZQ-5203) Respondents VERSUS 1 Pima Bai Wd/o Om Prakash Mehar, agead about 30 years, 2 Kumari Pinki d/o. Om Prakash Mehar, aged about 12 years, 3 Vinay S/o. Om Prakash Mehar, aged about 07 years, 4 Ajay, S/o. Om Prakash Mehar, aged about 04 years, 5 Radheshyam S/o. Samaru Mehar, aged about 55 years, 6 Ganesiya Bai, W/o Radhe Shyam, aged about 50 years, Respondent No. 2, 3 & 4 through their legal guardian mother Pima Bai All are R/o. Village Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) Claimants 7 Smt. Amarjeet Kaur, w/o. Amrik Singh, aged about 50 years, R/op. Qt. No. 15, Sarvodaya Colony, Tatibandh, Raipur. (Owner of the Truck No.C.G.04-ZC- 6637) Bali Ram Sahu S/o. Prem Singh A?T\ ? ^^.^^^ ^ \.'WJ./ '%S'F<^' Sahu, aged about 45 years, R/o. Dumar Talab Aamanaka, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Driver of the Truck No. C.G.04-ZQ- 5203) Memorandum ofAppeal U/S. 173 ofthe MotorVehicles Act Present: Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the appellant. ORDER (1st July, 2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, leamed counset for the appellant, in view of the fact that the appellant js not responding to his communication for sending his affidavit in support of the application for condonation of the delay and the deposit receipt, seeks permission to withdraw the appeal flled by the appellant/ owner of the Tractor against the impugned award dated 29-12-2008, passed by the 14th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.159/2006 with the liberty of filing another appeal against the impugned award as and when the affidavit in support of the delay condonation application and the deposit receipt are made available by the appellant. 2) Permission granted. 3) With the above liberty, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. •"^^.. ^^"^'•>- '•^•^^ ^'t/! nimmt 4) The Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned award to learned counsel for the appellant immediately. — Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge