1 2025:CGHC:49282 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1522 of 2025 1 - Akhileshwar Painkra S/o Kamla Prasad (Wrongly Mentioned Kamla In The Impugned Award) Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Kevri, Police Station And Tahsil Lakhanpur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh)............ (Vehicle Driver) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Amrawati W/o Late Rajendra Painkra, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)..........(Claimant No. 1) 2 - Chiranjiv, S/o Late Rajendra Painkra, Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Amrawati, W/o Late Rajendra Painkra, R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)..........(Claimant No. 2) 3 - Sarvasati, D/o Late Rajendra Painkra, Aged About 13 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Amrawati, W/o Late Rajendra Painkra, R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)..........(Claimant No. 3) 4 - Ravikumar, S/o Late Rajendra Painkra, Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Amrawati, W/o Late Rajendra Painkra, R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)..........(Claimant No. 4) 5 - Bholaram, S/o Late Jeeturam Painkra, Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)..........(Claimant No. 5) 6 - Smt. Ganeshwari, W/o Bholaram, Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Palma, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh) 2 7 - Tata A I G General Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office, First Floor, 106-07, Valfot Ozon, Bilaspur Road, Near Fafadeeh Chowk, Raipur (Chhattisgarh).............(Insurer) 8 - Chhatrapal Painkra, S/o Bhondu Ram Painkra, Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Harratikra, Police Station Manipur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh)...........(Vehicle Owner) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : None, in two rounds Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 25/09/2025 1) As there is no representation on behalf of appellant even when the matter is taken up for hearing in second round, there is no other option left with the Court but to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. 2) Consequently, the instant appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya