Nw ‘a 1’ a J ' Presem : APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1938 None for the appellants Shn Subhash Yadav Iearned counsei for resondent No2 HIGH COURT OF CHATT!S HGARH AT BILASU PR p DlVISlON BENCH CORAMz‘ HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. M A No 669 of 2002 Appellants 1. Smt. Meena Soni, Wlo Late Laxminarayan - Soni aged about 35 years 2, Dharmendra Sam S/o Late Laxmmarayan L3” / Son! aged about 19 years 3, Ku. RaJnL Soni, D/o Late Laxminarayan Soni aged about 16years 4, Ashlsh Kumar Som S/o Late Laxmlnaravan Soni aged about 10 years 5, Jagdash Prasad Soni, S/o Late Shri Ramsahay, aged about 66 years 6, Smt Tanm bal Som Wlo Jagdlsh Prasad Som aged about 61 years AH Rio VIlIage Achhotl Post — Godhl P S Nandm (Ahuwara) Tah Dhamdha Dist: ‘ Durg (Chhattlsgarh) Versus 2 §$m Respondents 1. Kishantai Sahu, S/o Ramchandra Sahu‘ aged about 50 years R/o village Jodhapur PS Tah 8: Distt Dhamtan \xj at present Keshkal Arlhant Traders Main Road, Bastar (Driver) 2. Surendra Kumar, S/o Dungar Chand Jain @ Padam Katariya aged about- years Rio Keshkai Drstt Jagdalpur ‘ (Owner) ‘ *x. 3. The National insurance Company Babia Complex G E Road Ralpur (Chhattisgarh) (insurer) (15m SegtRegEa; zoos) he foliowing orr of the Court was assed ’ b T de p y Rajeev Gupta, C.J. None for the appeuants. As there rs no representaion on bealf of the appeilants we are left With no other option but to dismiss the aeal for want n _ \ , 3. The appeal therefore ls dismissed for want of prosecution 4 17 . Consequently, MCP No 10i2002 also stands 2‘ t h _ pp l f prosecutlon o . dismissed for want of prosecution l ,Ml Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinhal Judge . Sd/- , Jr V‘ Chief Justice W .,_ Shr nand Gupta, learned counsel on behaf of hri Raj Awasthi, iearn‘ed counse‘l for respondent No.3. i A i S