1 2025:CGHC:31433 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 794 of 2017 Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited Aged About 26 Years Through Authorized Signatory, Sajit Ku. Ray, R/o Ii Floor, Jeet Towers, Ge Road, Raipur, Police Station Azad Chowk, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant versus 1 - Durgesh Kumar @ Rinku Soni S/o Mathura Prasad Soni, Aged About 23 Years R/o Shivvaji, Ward No. 05, Sanjay Colony, Balodabazar, P. S. City Kotwali, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ganesh Ram Khatriya, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Ahirwara, Sheetlapura, Police Station Nandini, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents MAC No. 1018 of 2017 Durgesh Kumar @ Rinku Soni S/o Mathura Prasad Soni, Aged About 20 Years R/o Shivaji Ward No. 5, Sanjay Colony Baloda Bazar, Police Station City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant versus 1 - Ganesh Ram Kshatriya S/o Mohan Khatriya, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Ahirwara, Shitlapara, Police Station Nandni, District Durg Chhattisgarh, Presently R/o Raman Mandir Ward, Chhunabhatti Ganj, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.....Driver And Owner of The Offending Vehicle Tata Ace No. C G-04-J D- 2886. 2 - Manager, Indian Exa General Insurance Co. Ltd., First Floor, Icon Survey No. 28, Dodankundi, Village K. R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore 37, West Bengal Branch Office Chawla Complex, 3rd Floor, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.07.08 18:35:43 +0530 2 Raipur Chhattisgarh,.....Insurer of The Offending Vehicle Tata Ace No. C G- 04- J D- 2886. ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : None For Respondents : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08.07.2025 1. None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the parties to press these appeals on repeated calls and it appears that the parties have lost interest in pursuing the present appeals, accordingly, this Court has left with no other option but to dismiss these appeals for want of prosecution. 2. In view of above, both the appeals are dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh