HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.NO. 2017 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 23.3.2007 passed by the III Additional Chief Judge cum Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal ’) in OP No. 2853 of 2004 filed by the claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- for the injuries- sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.9.2004 when the claimant returning from his work on cycle, the offending lorry bearing No. AP 16T 3804 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the cycle from behind. Due to which, the claimant received grievous injuries and received permanent disability. The first respondent owner of the lorry bearing No. AP 16 T 3804 remained ex parte and the second respondent- United India Insurance Company Limited filed its counter denying the averments made in the petition. 2. The Tribunal held that the driver of crime vehicle was not examined and Ex. B1 policy admittedly is in force by the date of accident and no evidence was adduced by R2 to prove that the conditions of the policy are violated. Ex. A6 is the disability certificate issued by D.V.K. V. Prasad, Orthopedician and both Exs A3 and A6 were issued by private hospitals and they shall be proved by examining the concerned doctor and accordingly dismissed the O.P. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant contended that the Tribunal ought to have observed the petitioner’s external injuries and disfigurement and it ought to have considered the disability of the claimant at 35%, which is partial and permanent in nature. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the order of the Tribunal is quite reasonable and there is no need to interfere with the order. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and also perused the entire material made available on record. 6. It is evident from the record that the accident occurred on 30.9.2004 when the claimant returning from his work on cycle, the offending lorry bearing No. AP 16T 3804 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner hit the cycle from behind. Due to which, the claimant received grievous injuries and received permanent disability. But the Tribunal dismissed the O.P. as the evidence did not meet the legal requirement of proof of a fact, which is within the exclusive knowledge of claimant only. But in this particular case, doctor was not examined and the disability certificate issued by D.V.K.V. Prasad, Orthopedician, and Ex. A3 is the MLC register issued by Appollo Hospital are by private hospitals and they are not public documents. Therefore, in the absence of any medical evidence, it is very difficult to assess the compensation. 7. In the circumstances, the Civil Miscellaneous appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration on merits in accordance with law. The Tribunal is directed to take up the mater and dispose of the same after adducing the evidence of doctor by the claimant so as to assess the disability. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 17.2.2011 KA