THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA NO.938 OF 2002 DATED : 24-6-2010 BETWEEN: Jaggavarapu Gurava Reddy, S/o.Gopi Reddy Appellant & 1. Battula Srinivasarao, S/o.Veera Raghavulu & others Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA NO.938 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the award dated 13-10-2000 passed in OP No.209 of 1996 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Addl. District Judge, West Godavari District at Eluru. The claimant-appellant herein made a claim for Rs.70,000/- on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor accident involving the accident lorry bearing registration No.ATS 3483 on 11-12-1995. The case of the appellant is that on the fateful day he was travelling in the accident lorry along with his black chips from G.Konduru to Yerrampalli village and when they reached Polavarm, Krishna District, the driver of the lorry driven the lorry in high speed and the lorry turned turtle and fell on the road side, due to the impact he sustained injuries on his spinal cart and other parts of the body. The complaint filed by the appellant before the concerned Police is marked as Ex.A-1, MV Inspector’s report is marked as Ex.A-2 and charge sheet is marked as Ex.A-3. The would certificate is marked as Ex.A-4. It is further case of the appellant that he has filed Ex.A-5, 14 medical bills incurred towards his treatment. 2. The Tribunal, by the impugned order dismissed the OP on the ground that the name of the appellant is not being tallied with the name written in the MV Inspector’s report who examined the accident lorry immediately after the accident. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the impugned award passed by the Tribunal. 4. As seen from Ex.A-2 report of MV Inspector, the name of the appellant is noted as “Veera Reddy”, but whereas the name of the appellant is “J. Gurava Reddy”. Except in Ex.A-2, the name of the appellant is noted as J. Gurava Reddy in other documents. Even as regards the medical bills under Ex.A-5 and wound certificate under Ex.A- 4 the name of the appellant noted as J.Gurava Reddy. But curiously, the doctor who treated the appellant was not examined. Had the doctor who treated the appellant been examined the appellant could have proved that he sustained the injuries in the accident and also the nature of injuries. 5. In the circumstance, the matter requires to be considered afresh. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the award and remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to both the parties to adduce fresh/further evidence. No costs. _______________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J Dated 24-6-2010 Nrg. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CMA NO.938 OF 2002 24-6-2010