ORDER : (Inderjeet Singh, J.) Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-Insurance Company challenging the orders dated 17.02.2022 as well as 19.04.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as "the learned Tribunal"), whereby the applications submitted on behalf of the petitioner-Insurance Company with regard to submitting the additional documents and recalling of the witness were dismissed by the learned Tribunal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent-claimant filed a claim petition seeking compensation on account of injuries received by him in a road accident. The petitioner-Insurance Company filed reply to the said claim petition and denied the averments. After recording the evidence of the claimant, the Insurance Company taken 12 dates for submitting their evidence ultimately the evidence of the Insurance Company was completed by the learned Tribunal on 26.02.2019. After completion of evidence, the Insurance Company filed an application before the learned Tribunal for calling file of the criminal case with regard to the said accident, however, the learned Tribunal vide its order dated 06.12.2021 dismissed the said application. The Insurance Company again filed an application before the learned Tribunal for submitting the statement of witnessess examined before the criminal Court, the said application was also dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide its order dated 17.02.2022. The Insurance Company further submitted an application for recalling of their witness, which was also dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide its order dated 19.04.2022. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 17.02.2022 and 19.04.2022. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Tribunal has committed serious illegality in not allowing the Insurance Company to submit the statement of witness recorded before the Criminal Court, as there is contradiction in the statement of witness. Counsel further submits that when the application for calling file of the criminal case was rejected by the learned Tribunal and the liberty was granted by the learned Tribunal to the Insurance Company for submitting the statement of witnesses. 4. In support of this contention, counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Rajendra Singh & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.2087/2000) decided on 14.03.2000. 5. 4. In support of this contention, counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Rajendra Singh & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.2087/2000) decided on 14.03.2000. 5. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has opposed the writ petition and submits that the learned Tribunal has rejected the application filed on behalf of the Insurance Company for calling of the decide file from the Criminal Court and the said order was not challenged by the Insurance Company, therefore, the Insurance Company is estopped to challenge the subsequent orders, as the prayer made in both the applications were similar. 6. In support of his contention, counsel for the respondents relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Cholamandalam v. Kaushalyabai & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10273/2018) decided on 24.11.2022. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed; for the reasons, firstly, the proceedings of the criminal case as well as the proceedings of the claim petition before the learned Tribunal are two separate proceedings and the statement of witness recorded in the criminal case cannot considered before the learned Tribunal in claim petition, as the Insurance Company has to prove its case before the learned Tribunal by leading their own evidence, secondly, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the application submitted on behalf of the Insurance Company for calling of the decide file from the Criminal Court vide its order dated 06.12.2021 and without challenging the same, the second application filed on behalf of the Insurance Company for submitting the statement of witness recorded in the said criminal case is not maintainable, as the prayer made in both the applications were similar in nature, thirdly, the Insurance Company has filed the application for recalling of the witness and submitting the additional documents at the fag end of the trial at the stage of final hearing, lastly, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, no case is made out for interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 9. Hence, the present writ petition stands dismissed. All the pending applications stand disposed of.