( 1 ) THE only issue that arises for consideration in this appeal would be the extent of disability suffered by the appellant. The fact of accident and the injuries sustained by him are not denied. He was treated in Gandhi Hospital. The peculiar thing I found in this case is as per the evidence of P. W. 2 who produced the case Sheet - Ex. X. 1 relating to the appellant mr. Narsimha, one Dr. Vasudeva Rao and srinivasa Rao have treated him. Subsequently, Vasudeva Rao was transferred to another hospital, the court sent summons to Vijaya Rama Rao who in turn deputed dr. Sanjay to give evidence in this case. As per Ex. A-5, the Medical Certificate relating to injuries received by the appellant was issued by one Dr. T. Prasad, Civil Asst. Orthaepedic Surgeon, Gandhi Hospital, secunderabad. The disability of the appellant is around 55%. P. W. 2 in the witness-box admitted that he has not seen the patient and for the first time, he has examined him in the court at the request of counsel for the appellant and he has given the particulars but the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the physical disability suffered by the appellant is about 25%. ( 2 ) FROM the above, it is seen that someone examined the appellant and someone treated him, someone was directed to appear before the Court and someone appeared and deposed in the case. Someone has given the medical Certificate. This shows that the lack of devotion and responsibility on the part of the doctors who treated the patient. It is well settled in law that their duty is not only to treat the patient but as and when their assistance is required by the Court, they have to come to the Court and depose about the facts of the case to enable the Court to come to the proper decision. The conduct of the Doctors in this case is highly deprecated. Since there is no authentic evidence about the percentage of disability suffered by the appellant, I have no option except of call for a finding from the Court by summoning either Dr. Vasudeva Rao or Dr. Srinivasa Rao who in fact, treated the appellant and arrive at the percentage of disability suffered by the appellant. Since there is no authentic evidence about the percentage of disability suffered by the appellant, I have no option except of call for a finding from the Court by summoning either Dr. Vasudeva Rao or Dr. Srinivasa Rao who in fact, treated the appellant and arrive at the percentage of disability suffered by the appellant. Before parting with the case, the court shall summon the doctor concerned by enclosing a copy of the order for reference and enforce his attendance in the Court. ( 3 ) THIS case is not first of jt s kind. We often notice lack of devotion to duty from the doctors in coming to the Court and giving evidence. They are also in the habit of issuing certificates though they never treated the patient. The Director of Medical and Heath sciences shall see that the menace is put on end by giving suitable directions to all the concerned that only doctors who treated the patient in Government Hospital alone should come to the Court and depose in the case and if any Certificate that has to be given the same has to given only by them but not every doctor who is having the qualification without examining the patient. ( 4 ) HENCE, I have no option except to direct the Tribunal to summon either Dr. Vasudeva rao or Dr. Srinivas Rao who treated the appellant and to give evidence in the Court. The evidence given by the doctor along with the certification about the disability given by him shall be sent to this Court within one month from the date of receipt of this order. ( 5 ) POST this matter after receipt of evidence from the Tribunal.