I wouldn't go with either of the names you suggested. When you use "no" chord notation typically you are changing the intended harmony of a chord to something the chord symbol was not ment to represent.
Let's look at what we have:
C G A Bb
I'm assuming the C is the bass note. It would be a stretch to call this any type of C chord because not only is there no 3rd, but there is also no 2nd or 4th. There is very rarely a chord with an omitted 3rd that is not suspend.(Besides a power chord which this is not.)
If we look at this chord as some kind of A chord it makes much more sense because we can stack the chord in thirds now and have it make sense:
A C _ G Bb
We still have no 5th, but the 5th is commonly omitted in larger chords. A to C makes a minor 3rd, the G is a minor 7th and the Bb is a b9. Because the C is in the bass, we will have to notate the chord in slash notation so we get:
Still a lengthy name, but it describes the function of the chord better than C13 no 3, 9, 11 where it is very odd to omit 3 notes in a chord.
Another thing to note is it is typical in a 13th chord to omit the 9th and 11th as they are optional. So the suggested name could be reduced to C13 no 3, but still it is odd to omit a 3rd without some kind of sus.