^,,,S.".B-^ ^i:t..^\ ..".tT''^.. V "i.W'"SS^, '"'• "•" ^w^ h Q^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DlVISiON BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. M.A.(CtPRNo.5aof2009 Non-claimant RESPONDENTS Venu Gopal Aiyer, S/b Gopal Aiyar, aged about 45 years, R/o Quarter No.31, Karmchari Nagar, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) (Owner & Driver of offending vehicle Maruti Car-800 bearins No.C.G.07/2250 VERSUS 1 The New India Insurance Company Limited, Bhilai, Tahsi! & District- Durg, (C.G.) (Insurer of offending vehicie Maruti Car-800 bearing No. C.G.07/2250) 2 Sunita More, W/o late Rajkumar More, aged about 29 years, R/o Pushak Nagar, Near Chouhan Water Word, By-pass Road Ke Neeche, Chowki Junwani, Police Station- Supela, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) 3 Ku. Manisha More, D/o Late Rajkumar More, aged about 12 years. 4 Shubham More, S/o Late Rajkumar More, aged about 10 years, 5 Gopal More, S/o Late Rajkumar More, aged about 8 years, 6. Ashish More, S/o Late Rajkumar More, aged about 4 years, 7. Ku. Bharti More, D/o Late Rajkumar More, aged about 10 months. Respondents No. 3 to 7 are Minor through their naturai Guardian Mother Sunita More, R/o. Pushak RAJESH KUMAR SONTEKE Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR SONTEKE Date: 2025.02.03 16:55:37 +0530 ,"e'Ri^ ..^ I Nagar, Near Chouhan Water Word, By-pass Road Ke Neeche, Chowki Jun\<vani, Polfce Station- Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) 8. Rajni Bai More, Wd/o Late Moti Ram More, aged about 55 years, R/o Mitpara, Diprapara, Durg, District-Durg (C.G.) ( Mother of the deceased Rajkumar More) APPEAL U/S 173 OF MOTORVEHICLE ACT. 1988 Present: Shri Sunil Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant. (28th February, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Shri Sunil Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant, in view of the fact that the appellant is not responding to his communication for sending the receipt of the mandatory deposit under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, seeks permission to withdraw the appeal filed by the appellant, with the liberty of filing another appeai against the impugned award as and when the receipt of mandatory deposit is made available by the appeliant. 2) Permission granted. 3) With the above liberty, the appeat is dismissed as withdrawn. 4) The Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned award to learned counsel for the appellant, immediatelv. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge