2026:CGHC:13434 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 325 of 2026 Virendra Kumar Ogle Son Of Late Shriram Ogle Aged About 53 Years Resident Of Road - 53, Quarter No.03/e Sector -08, Bhilai, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Bhanu Prasad Gandharv Son Of Shyamacharan Gandhav Aged About 35 Years Resident Of 1- Satmara, Thana Gundardehi, District - Balod Chhattisgarh, 2-C/o- Smt. Anita Verma, Plot No.15, Road No.06, Pragati Nagar, Thana - Newai, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

2 - Anita Verma Plot No.15, Road No.06, Pragati Nagar, Thana - Newai, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

3 - Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd. Simran Tower Second Floor, In Front Of L.I.C. Building Pandari, Raipur, Tahsil And District -

Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shr i Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

Order on Board

19/03/2026 1. Heard.

2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 17.02.2026 passed by the learned Fifth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg in Civil Case No. MACT/123/2022 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recording evidence of the Doctor who issued the Disability Certificate to the petitioner, has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a claimant before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, where he is prosecuting the claim case for compensation on account of his injuries which has been caused to him in motor accident with the offending vehicle car bearing registration No. C.G. 07 BS 7776 at Bhilai. By the said accident, he received grievous injuries on various parts of his body and against the said accident and injuries, he filed an application for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The claimant/petitioner has been examined before learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg on 18.11.2024 and his cross examination was completed on 14.08.2025. Since, the petitioner was injured in the accident and he could not be examined himself before the District Medical Board and could not obtain any medical certificate, he has not proposed for examination of Doctor in support of his case, however, he could get himself examined by the Orthopedic Surgeon on 10.02.2026 and only thereafter, he could obtained his Disability Certificate which has been produced before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on 16.02.2026 alongwith the application for permission to examine the Doctor who issued the said Disability Certificate.

4. He would further submit that to prove the injuries of the claimant/

petitioner, examination of Doctor is necessary and for want of any Disability Certificate he could not proposed the Doctor to be examined in the case. Immediately after obtaining the Disability Certificate, he moved the application alongwith the document, therefore, the petitioner/ applicant may be permitted to get the Doctor examined in the case in his support as his witness. He would further submit that the non-applicant witness has not been examined till date though the case was fixed for recording of non applicant’s witness. He would also submit that no prejudice would be caused to the opposite party and they have every right to cross examine the witness, therefore, the application may be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside.

5. I have learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material annexed with the petition.

6. From perusal of the document annexed with the petition, it transpires that the petitioner is a claimant in the claim case pending before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg where he was prosecuting his application for compensation on account of his injuries caused in a motor accident. During the proceeding, he filed an application on 12.02.2026 under Order 7 Rule 14 of CPC for taking his Disability Certificate on record which was i