RAJU Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision Petitioner has focused the present Civil Revision Petition before this Court, as an aggrieved person, as against the order dated 21.12.2010 in I.A. No. 549 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 418 of 2008 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge (Claims Tribunal), (Fast Track Court No. IV), Bhavani, Erode District, in directing the Revision Petitioner/Petitioner to appear before the Medical Board, Erode, for proper assessment of his 'Permanent Disability'. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Claimant/Respondent urges before this Court that the trial Court has committed an error in allowing the I.A. No. 549 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 418 of 2008 on the file of the trial Court (filed by the Respondent/Insurance Company) dated 21.12.2010.

(2.) According to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Claimant, the trial Court has failed to appreciate a vital fact that I.A. No. 549 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 418 of 2008 on the file of the trial Court is per se not maintainable in law, because of the fact that the Respondent/3rd Respondent/ Insurance Company has filed the said Interlocutory Application without making an endeavour to disprove the Disability Certificate produced by PW2-Doctor (examined on the side of the Claimant) and further on the wrong premise, the Respondent/ Insurance Company apprehends that the percentage of the disability mentioned by PW2 is on the higher side.

(3.) Lastly, it is the plea taken on behalf of the Petitioner/Claimant that under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, no one can be permitted to create documents and evidence to disprove the evidence already adduced on behalf of the Petitioner/Claimant, based on assumptions and apprehensions.