•\^~^\^\^Lv\^~^V\^VW-^\^'^-\^r^-^-^^"•"; VA ^.. ^l IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGATH AT BILASPUR IVI.A.C.No.!2-/3fc' /2009 MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988 Appellants: ,.^ 'tfS /*^\'°^ ^^- ^-^ y f&t ^TB"^ ..'•"»y 1. 2. Respondents: VERSUS 1. (^. 2. <- 3. ^ 4. Ramesh Kumar, S/o Kaleshwar Verma, aged about 25 years, the then tractor driver, bearing No. CG-IO-A-6951. (Non-applicant No.1) Radheshyam, S / O Radhelal Verma, aged about 26 years, owner, Tractor NO.CG-IO-A6951, (Non-applicant no.2) Both residents ofvillage Junwani, Police Station & Tah. Patharia, District Bilaspur (CG) Ramkrishna, S /O late Lakhanlal Verma, aged about 23 years, Dukalhin Bai, Wd/o Lakhanlal Verma, aged about 42 years, Ku. Padmani, D/o late Lakhanlal Verma, aged about 17 years, Chhedia Bai, Wd/o Kejaram Verma, aged about 65 years, Respondent no.3-minorthrough the Mother & natural guardian Smt. Dukalhin Bai, All residents of village Dalpurwa, Post Jareli, P. S. Patharia, Tahsil Mungeli, District Bilaspur (CG). The New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office, Bilaspur(CG) (Non-applicant No.3) Arising out of the award dated 2/12/2008 passed byAdditional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC) Mungeli, District Bilaspur, which was presided over by Shri D.L.Katakwar, in Claim Case No. 13/2008, Ramkrishna and others v. RAmesh Kumar and others (Annexure A-1). MEMORANDUM OF MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 AWARD _RS-J[-717-Q'U- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON'BLE MR. G. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ, Appellants MA (Cl No. 236 of 2009 Ramesh Kumar and another ^ \\ L, Respondents Vs Ramkrishna and others Present: None for the appellants. Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the respondent No.5. ORDER (Orall (26tnAugust,2011) Perl.M.Quddusi.J; List is being revised. The matter was called out twice. However, no one appeared on behalf of the appellants to press this appeal. In these circumstances, we are left with no option but to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge SdA . ":.- G. Minhajuddin Judge J U D G E