Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt.Janki Bai And Others
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR
[CHHATTISGARH1 Misc.Appeal No.l "
OF 20( APPELLANT ^NSURER ^Oriental Insurance Company Limited through its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon, through Divisional Manager, Near Normal School, BUaspur CG).
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS CLAIMANT /-l.Smt. Janki Bai w/o Chain Singh Gond aged 40 years, r/o Village - Seonikhurd (Kosatola), Tehsil 8s District Kawardha, presently residing at through Pramila Mourya, Chingrajpara, Tehsil & District BUaspur CG).
/ IXIVER k Bhushan alias Chandra Bhushan Isai, aged 38 years, r/o Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, presently residing at Samnapur, P.S.
Rengakhar, District Kawardha (CG).
OWNER 3, Jallu Singh s/o Ramdas Pardhi, aged "30 years, through Rajendra Singh s/o Bhuwan Singh Thakur, r/o Ward No.ll, Kawardha, Dist.
Kawardha (CG).
PQSSESSION HOLDER z"
4. Rajendra Singh Thakur s/o Bhuwan 5ingh Thakur, aged 34 years, r/o Ward No.ll, Kawardha, Dist. Kawardha (CG).
APPEAL U/S OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE AWARD/ORDER DATED ^5/3/2005 PASSED BY THE^TENTH ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (FTQ, BILASPUR IN C.T. NC):67/2004.
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Misc. Appeal No.122 of 2006 Oriental Insurance Company Limited --Appellant
Versus
Smt. Janki Bai & Ors.
-- Respondents For appeilant : Shri Amit Bakshi, Advocate on behalf of Shri Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate.
^, For respondents 2 & 4 : Shri DC Verma, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri JusticeChandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board 23.12.2016 The matter is listed for hearing on IA No.01/12 under Order 5 Rule 20 of CPC for substituted notice to respondents 1 & 3 through paper pubtication.
2.
On perusal of the order sheet dated 14.6.2012, it appears that the appellant has been granted two weeks to furnish correct and complete address of respondents on the basis of peremptory order. Counsel for the appellant failed to demonstrate on which date he has complied'the order dated 14.6.2012. 3.
With this, as the appellant failed to comply with order dated 14.6.2012, the effect of the instant appeal would be automatic dismissal.
The appeal is deemed automatically dismissed in compliance oforderdated 14.6.2012.
Sd/- (Chandra Bhushah Bajpai) JUDGE Bini