NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. DANGETI PYDEMSETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As all these Civil Revision Petitions arise out of separate but identical orders between the same parties, they are heard and being disposed of together. Respondent No. 1 has entered appearance through Sri. B. Gajendra Reddy, learned Counsel. At the hearing, he is not present Even though notices have not been served on respondent Nos. 2 and 3, as they are only driver and the owner of the vehicle insured with the petitioner-National Insurance Company Limited, Kakinada, and which has allegedly caused accident to respondent No. 1, their presence for disposal of these Civil Revision Petitions is not necessary. Hence, this Court decided to dispose of these three Civil Revision Petitions without awaiting service of notices on the said respondents. Respondent No. 1 filed OP.No. 768 of 2009 claiming Rs. 4 lakhs as compensation for the alleged amputation of his left leg due to the accident taken place on 28-12-2008. He has pleaded that the vehicle owned by respondent No. 3 and driven by respondent No. 2 was insured with the petitioner. It is his further case that due to the accident, his left leg was crushed and the same was amputated. Respondent No. 1 filed Ex.A.5-disability certificate issued by the Area Hospital, Amalapuram, on 22-01-2011 in support of his claim.

(2.) The petitioner has filed a written statement on 16-06-2010. The evidence on the side of respondent No. 1 was completed by 12-12-2011. When the OP was coming up for the evidence on the petitioner's side, it has filed three IAs and one memo. IA.No. 1528 of 2011 was filed under Order XVIII Rule 3A and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') to permit the petitioner to examine the "District Medical Board, Kakinada". IA.No. 1529 of 2012 was filed under Order XVI Rule 7A and Section 151 CPC for issuing summons to the Superintendent of the District Medical Board, East Godavari District, Kakinda, to produce the original document relating to a purported disability Certificate, dated 14-12-2008, stated to have been issued by the District Medical Board on 14-12-2008 i.e., two weeks before the occurrence of the accident. IA.No. 1530 of 2011 was filed under Order VIII Rule 9 and Section 151 CPC to permit the petitioner to file additional counter. Memo SR No. 3136 of 2011 was filed under Order XII Rule 8 CPC to record issuance of notice by the petitioner to respondent No. 1 calling upon him to produce the original of the purported disability Certificate, dated 14-12-2008, issued by the District Medical Board, Kakinada.

(3.) All the above IAs and the unregistered Memo were dismissed by the Court of the learned VIII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) East Godavari District, Rajahmundry, by separate Orders, dated 17-02-2012. Feeling aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner filed CRP Nos. 1312, 1878, 1306 and 1524 of 2012 against I.A. Nos. 1528, 1529, 1530 of 2011 and Memo (SR) No. 3136 of 2012 respectively.