1 2026:CGHC:23028 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1307 of 2022 1 - Kuleshwari Bai Sahu W/o Late Likesh Kumar Aged About 41 Years R/o House No. 37/3, Sankra, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 2 - Pranvesh Sahu S/o Late Likesh Kumar Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Kuleshwari Bai Sahu, R/o House No. 37/3, Sankra, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 3 - Isha Sahu D/o Late Likesh Kumar Aged About 13 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Kuleshwari Bai Sahu, R/o House No. 37/3, Sankra, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 4 - Kunj Bai W/o Nanak Ram Aged About 64 Years R/o House No. 37/3, Sankra, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 5 - Nanak Ram Sahu S/o Late Purshottam Lal Sahu Aged About 69 Years R/o House No. 37/3, Sankra, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Kaushal Kumar Shau S/o Kalyan Singh Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Dhiri, P.O. Somni, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Offending Motorcycle No. CQ-07, BQ-5691), 2 - Jharokhe Lal Sahu S/o Kalyan Singh Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o By Zainendra Kumar Sinha, Talab Road Near Kua Moti, Durg , District Durg Chhattisgarh, Permanent Address Village Dheri, Po. Somni, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh, (Owner Of The Offending Motorcycle No. Cg-07-BQ-5691) BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.05.15 14:34:00 +0530 2 3 - Manager, The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Parakh Complex, Santrabadi Durg, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Motorcycle No. Cg-07-BQ-5691) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : None For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/05/2026 1. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed against the impugned award dated 29.07.2022 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg CG in Claim Case No.110/2020. 2. On the previous dates of hearing, i.e., 01.12.2025 & 16.01.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. 3. Today, when the matter was called for hearing, there was again no representation on behalf of the appellants, which shows that the appellants are no longer interested in prosecuting the appeal. 4. Hence, in the absence of any representation on behalf of the appellants, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai