APPIELLANTS ~ I CLAIMANTS RESPONDENTS NON-fAPPLICANTs i \ \ > V gEmjkémm '1. Ganeshiya ,Bai, W/o. Birjhu, ' f Age 3O years, Occupation- Cultivator 8a Labourer. Pratap Singh @ Mehatab Singh S/o. Blrjhu, Aged about 4 , W years, Minor, through guardian mother (Appellant No. 1) Both are Resident of village Krishnapur @ Kaluwa, Police Station 8r. Tahs11 Surajpur, D1stt Surguja (C G ) VERSUS 1] Krishna’Kumar Gupta, S/o. g” Ramdayal Gupta, Age about 35 . /? years, Occupation-Driver, -R/o. Mine .Colony, .Bl‘latgaon, Post Bhatgaon, Police ‘ Station Pratappur, Tahsil-Surajpur, Distt. ,Suréuja (C.G.) " (DRIVER) /v— 2. Israr Khan S/o. Niyajuddin, Owner of Khan Mini Bus, _~I_(\}eneral Store, Jarhl Colony, Bhatgaon colliery, ‘Post Bhatgaon, P S Pratappur, Tah- Surajpur, Distt SurguJa (C G ) (OWNER) A ‘ ““““‘ gaw—vv. —~—T:. A IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR , a MA. No. f} ZL’M2004 E1 W w The 0r?€§i~tal Insurance Company V‘mited, Through Branch Mandéér, Branch Office Manendragarh Road, Ambedkar ChoWk, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.‘). (INSURER) I ‘§ - / i :‘Mlsc. APPEAL U/s. 173 oEM.v.ACT, 19§8 a hri Shnkla submits that though the appellan \‘vclaimants have examined the witnesses but the ‘ Tribunal did not aEord opportunity to pmduoe them ”for crossexammatlon and as the mam of - mmesses in. the - absence of cross‘exammaaon H cannot be considemd asevidence, theil‘dbnnalam" x ; closing the opportunity dismissed the claim pettion.» I Therefore, the dismissal in the insmnt case is under Order 17Ru1e20fCivilProeedureCodeandnot %‘ under Order 17 Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code 3. h In mew of above, the appellants seek t0 withdmw tl'ns appeal with liberty to me application for restoration a § ’ofthecase under Order 9 RuleQefC PIC” 4. l ‘I The libert as raed for is amed S m/ y py g