✦ High Court of India · 17 Apr 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 17 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
17 Apr 2025
Length
1,192 words

4. Smt.Gouni Lalithamma, w/o Late Alla Reddy, Age. 67years, Occ. Household, r/o Gopanpally village, Devarkadra Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. (died) L.R.Petitoner No.1. Smt.Gouni Saritha. Petition is amended as per lvlemo Dated. 14-6-2024. Petitioner No.'1 . is the legal heir of deceased petitioner No.4.) AND ...REVISION PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/CLAIMANTS

1. Golla Mahesh, s/o. Golla Gattanna Age. Major, Occ. Driver of Tractor and Trailer No. TS-32-B-0580 and AP 22- AK 6357, r/o H.No. 1-'19/1 , Pinam Cherla village, Mulamalla Post, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

2. Kondanna Golla, s/o Golla Allenna Age. Major, Occ. Agriculture, and Registered Owner of Tractor and Trailer No. TS-32-B-0580 and AP 22-AK 6357, (Trailer purchased and possessor, not transferred in his name), r/o H.No. '1-75. Pinamcherla village, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy Districl.

3. The Royal Sundaram General lnsurance Co.Ltd, represented by its Manager, Jewel Pawani Towers, 5th Floor, 6-3-1 109/1, A Block, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. (Certificate of lnsurance and Policy No. V000427305000100, Policy Period from 12-7-2017 to 'l 1-7-2018) Policy certificate issued branch Office. Somajiguda.

4. Chalma Reddy Balayagari, s/o Kantha Reddy Age. Alajor, Occ. Agriculture and Reg istered owner of Traile r AP 22-AK 6357, r I o H. No. 1 0-36i3, Kothakota Proper and Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

5. The IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd, represer:ed by its Manager, Sanathnagar, SBU, Flat No.202, PKR Complex, Opp RR Motors, Phase-l KPHR Colony, Secunderabad. (Trailer No. AP-22-AK-6: 57 insured) Policy 1- FWFNU27, Puoo Policy. 29873125, Period of lnsurarc: from 28-6-2017 to 27 -6-2018) ...RESPONDEl,l -S/ RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praylng that in the ci 1 Jmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mz 1 be pleased pleased pending disposal of civil revision petition, to stay all further 1> cceedings in MVOP No. 23 of 2019 on the file of the Honourable Motor Accid: rts Claims Tribunal- cum-l Addl.District J udge, Mahabubnagar. Counsel for the Petitioners: Counsel for the Respondents: SRI. K VENKATESH GIJ 'TA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTIGE JUWADISRIDEVI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1 341 of 2025 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners/claimants challenging the order in l.A.No.72 of 2025 in M.V.O.P.No.23 of 2019, daled 12.02.2025 passed by the Court of lVlotor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, lVlahabubnagar. By the impugned order, the application filed by the petitioners seeking to re-open the petitioners evidence for adducing further evidence was dismissed.

02. Heard Mr.K.Venkatesh Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared on behalf of respondents Perused the record

03. The impugned order passed by the trial Court is as follows This petition is coming for petitioners evidence from

28.01 .2021 , Ihe petitioner did not get ready for several adjournments. On O8 12-2022 cost was imposed but even then the petitioner did not get ready. Finally on 09.03.2023 PW1 examined in Chief and cross was deferred from time to time either because the respondent did not get ready or the PW1 did not 2 attend. The docket order further shows that from

2.10.2023 1o

06.11.2023 the PW1 did not appeared for crosr; exa mination. Even on 21 .05.2024 PWl did not appear of cros:; exa mination. Later on pretext that 4th petitioner died, for sake : amendment petitioner took time upto 20.08.2024. Thereafter ,t t 20.11 .2024 when the matter is coming for appearance of PW: the witness did not appear as such on costs of Rs.100l me t er posted to

13.12.2024 and finally on that day the witness was present and cross examined. When the matter ls posted on 0 .01 .2025 Ior further evidence of petitioner, there is no represei- ation by, the petitioner, as such petitioners evidence was closed and accordingly, petition was dismissed.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioners sui rnits that the copy of R.O.R is necessary document to prove tl-r case of the claimants and the deceased owns agricultural land ,: rd was doing agriculture. The copy of the document sought to br produced is the public document and as such, it can be receive, in evidence for just and proper adjudication of the matter. '1' e impugned order suffers from perversity and dismissal of the p:tition would cause great hardship to the petitioners and hence pr ryed to allow the Civil Revision Petition. 3

05. Upon perusal of the impugned order and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court opines that since the PWI was cross examined on 13.12.2024 and the matter is coming for further evidence of PW1, no prejudice would be caused if one more opportunity is given to the PW1 to adduce evidence. Hence, for proper adjudication of the matter, this Court is inclined to allOw this Civil Revision Petition and the learned trial Court is directed to conduct the trial by granting an opportunity for further evidence of PW1 by fixing a specific date. lt is needless to say that the otherside shall be given ample opportunity for cross-examining PWl . . However, if the petitioner fails to appear and adduce evidence and cooperate with the trial on the date so specified by the concerned trial Court, -- this Order shall stand cancelled

06. With the above directions, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the Order passed by the learned trial Court dated 12.02.2025 in l.A.No.72 o'f 2025 in lV.V.O.P.No.23 of 2019 Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. Note : That the date of order on cause title sheet and on docket sheet of CRP No.1341 of 2025 is wronglY shown as 7 OtO4t2O25 and 23 I 0412025 respectively and the same is suomoto corrected as 17t04t2025. SD/- L.LAKSHMI BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR Cp?tJ-- Thrs order substitutes the earlier order dispatched on 1StO7/2025. //TRUE COPY// SD/ L. LAKSHMI BABU t) :PUTY REGISTRAR ,1| SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal _cum _ \dditiional District Judge, Mahabubnagar. One CC to SRt. K VENKATESH GUPTA Advocate [OptJ )] Two CD Copies 2 J TUPSUgh PraS. ) l I _= t, =+i&d HIGH COURT DATED: 1710412025 AMENDED ORDER CRP.No.1341 ol 2025 \ :ar;-"s ]ATE it' ,l !i I (-.j \ iltrt$t02$ -,. {, ESP{:7 ./ D i DISPOSING OF THE C.R,P. -PAc-., 241>v-L' '.) 1'jr:5r+:*

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments