THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A. No.703 of 2003 JUDGMENT: Claimants in O.P.No.242 of 1997 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, East Godavari, Kakinada, have filed this appeal. The said O.P. was clubbed with O.P.No.220 of 1997 filed by the claimants therein viz., Citra Laxmi, Citra Venkata Satyavathi, Citra Rambabu and Citra Surya Lacha- Alias-Lachi. Both the O.Ps. arose out of the same accident that occurred on 13-09-1996, which caused the death of one Satyanarayana. Claimants in the said O.Ps. set up rival claims in respect of the compensation sought for on account of the death of the said deceased. The claimant No.1 in O.P.No.242 of 1997 Chitra Subbalakshmi and the first claimant in O.P.No.220 of 1997 Citra Laxmi both claimed to be the legally wedded wife of the deceased. In view of the conflicting claims, common evidence was recorded in O.P.No.220 of 1997. P.W.1 is Citra Laxmi and P.W.4 is Chitra Subbalakshmi. In the evidence of the said claimants, both claimed as the legally wedded wife. P.W.3, Citra Chinna Rao, is the brother of the deceased, who in his evidence stated that the deceased was a physically challenged person and as nobody came forward to marry him, he along with his father and brothers executed Ex.A1 gift deed in favour of Citra Laxmi and got them married. On the other hand, Chitra Subbalakshmi filed the voters’ identity cards as Exs.A9 and A10 and Ex.A11 study certificate issued by the Head Master, Mandal Parishad Primary School, H.Kothuru, to show that the deceased Satyanarayana was the father of Chitra Sreenu, claimant No.4 in O.P.No.242 of 1997, and voters list’ and ration cards as Exs.12 and 13. On a consideration of the entire material, the Tribunal accepted the evidence of Citra Laxmi and held that she is the legally wedded wife. Since the Tribunal did not consider the effect of the documentary evidence in Exs.A9 to A13, upon which reliance was placed, the claimants in O.P.No.242 of 1997 have filed this appeal. The claimants in O.P.No.220 of 1997 Citra Laxmi and others had also filed a separate appeal C.M.A.No.9 of 2001. The said appeal was disposed of by orders of this court dated 31-12- 2009 by extending and fastening the liability on the Insurance Company also. Be that as it may, the learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the Tribunal grievously erred in not considering the effect of the documentary evidence in Exs.A9 to A13. Based on the said documents the counsel would submit that the finding of the Tribunal that Citra Laxmi is the legally wedded wife is liable to be set aside and held that the appellants/claimants are alone entitled for the compensation awarded to the exclusion of the claimants in O.P.No.220 of 1997. It may be mentioned that although the O.Ps. were disposed of by a common order, both parties adopting rival contentions with regard to their status being legally wedded wife, unless the findings in O.P.No.220 of 1997 are also reversed, it is not possible to grant relief in this appeal. The appellants have also not impleaded the said rival claimants to this appeal. Any order reversing the said finding would affect the interests of the claimants in O.P.No.220 of 1997. In the absence of the said parties, the appellants are not entitled for any relief in this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 12th August, 2010. Skmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A. No.703 of 2003 Date : 12-08-2010 Between : Chitra Subbalakshmi and three others .. Appellants And Balaji and Others .. Respondents