NANNAPURAJU NARASIMHA RAJU Vs. NANNAPURAJU LAXMI VEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 06.07.2012 in I.A.No.565 of 2012 in O.S.No.1000 of 2009, on the file of the Additional Family court, Hyderabad, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein under order XVI Rule 14 CPC seeking issuance of summons to the gynaecologist concerned, who examined the respondent, for the purpose of giving evidence, was dismissed.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the respondent. Perused the record.

(3.) THE petitioner, or for that matter any party, can seek issuance of summons by the Court only to a named witness. The petitioner cannot seek summons to unknown or unnamed persons. The prayer in the present application seeking issuance of summons to the medical officer concerned is vague. No doubt as mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the medical report contains the signatures of the medical officers who constituted the board, but not their names. It is for the petitioner to ascertain the names of the medical officers and seek issuance of summons to them. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the letter addressed by him to the RMO of the Osmania General Hospital on 24.07.2011 seeking information about the names and addresses of the medical officers did not evoke any response. When that is so, it is open to the petitioner to exercise his right under the provisions of the Right to Information Act and seek necessary information from the authorities of the Osmania General Hospital and furnish the same to the Family Court and seek issuance of summons afresh to the named witnesses. The impugned order, dismissing the present application, does not call for any interference.