}' c^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURB AT BILASPUR rCHHATTISGARHl MISC. APPEAL N0.' QF 200^ APPELLANT ^SURANCE ^Manager, The Oriental Insu. Company Ltd. Kachhari Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^/O 0^^ ^^ru^^l ^.\{^^ .\w/ ^w DRIVER. ^" ^. Durpath bai W/p Late Bhagirathi Varma aged 43 years. 2. Tulya bai D/o Bhagirathi ^ varma aged about 25 years 3. Biram bai D/o Bhagirathi <^ varma aged about 24 years 4. Hemlata Bai D/o Bhagirathi ^varma aged about 23 years 5. Ku. Pushpa bai D/o ^ Bhagirathi varma aged about 20 years ,6. Ku. Madhu D/o Bhagirathi varma aged about 17 years (For the respondent no.6 In the capacity of guardian Her Mother Smt. Durpath bai) All the respondent R/o Village Karmada post-office Kamrda Disst. Raipur. T. Dilip Kumar s/o Shiv Kumar Rajak, Through m/s vardhman kargo carrier T.P. Nagar Tatibandh Raipur) CG OWNER /" ,.8. M/sVardhman Kargo Carrier T.P.Nagar,Tatibandh, Raipur, District-Raipur (CG). ^" APPEAL U/S 173 OF MOTOR yEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE AWARD/ORDER DATED 13)^972005 PASSBD BY THE^IFTH UPPBR MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL. RAIPUR. DISTRICT RAIPUR IN CLAIM CASE N07 17/2004. \^c'" . • __ ^ w^"_ Appealvalued at Rs. 1.62.000/-, Court Fee affixed Rs.15/- The appellant respectfully begs to submit as under: XI-HC-22 3^ ^Nlcrt^, ^Tfl^4l<o, fsl^lHy ^M.^.li^'i w^^rrawT^ f^fr^^. 200 INSN^I.^ ^ 3n^?T^T Rl^i<=b3TT^T ^TW^cT $b<4|c»)^ su>^ v/ W^T ?^<TTW ^f?cf Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri S.R. Nayak, CJ & Hon'Me Shri D.R. Deshmukhl 03-07-2006, Shri S.C. Verma, learned 0unsel for the appetlant. Finally, two weeks' time i|s which the appeal shall stand di^missed furttier order from the Court. Sd/- ChiefJustice <=t)i^[^i41-i ^i^<nT^te^<f^^i< ^3Tf^T3TI^?T A granted to remove the defaults, faillng for non-prosecutton without any Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge (^fl^^Ra^) XI-HC-78 3T1^T^T{^T cTSTTW^Tsb^icb 3^ •^Hld<4, ^TO^JI<o, f^dKriy HTHClTSb^l^h 3T(^?T q'^7 (^i^^) ^3:200^, )^<frw ^f^r ^TT^T <=bi<4t<n<n<i ^iH^ tfe^'d^^i^ ^3:rf^T3TI^T 2^/07/2006 This M.A. (P.R.) No. 1192/2006 is treated as dismissed for non compliance of per-emptory order dated 03/07/2006. (for details Note Sheet part may kindly be seen). Counsel accordingly. t)e informed Sd/- A.R.(J) l/ H-T-F-T-"-T