Power of Attorney Holder--Attorney cannot depose regarding the fact, which is not in his knowledge or to which he is not privy, but does not exclude reliability, authenticity and validity of the statement of the attorney relating to a fact which is in his personal knowledge and to which he may be privy or a party.
Fake driving licence--Owner discharged his obligation satisfying himself regarding skill of the driver and the fact that he is holding a driving licence--The owner or the employer has no means to find out that driving licence is fake--Liability to pay the compensation fastened exclusively on the Insurance Company.

Permod Kohli, J.

1. All these appeals bearing F. A. O. Nos.4927 of 2006, 5060 of 2006 and 5061 of 2006, preferred by owner of the offending vehicle arise out of awards dated 22nd July, 2006, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, rupnangar in M. A. C. T. Nos.43 of 2005, 44 of 2004 and 101 of 2004, out of the same accident.

2. From the impugned awards, following facts have emerged:

3. On 21st September, 2004, One Ram sharma, his wife Smt. Geeta Sharma and her niece Pooja Sharma, were riding a scooter bearing registration No. P. B.32-4019. They were coming from Banga to Nurpur Bedi and were followed by Sham Sharma and Jatinder sharma on a motor cycle. At about 4.30 p. m. when they reached in the revenue limits of nalhoti, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, on Nurpur bedi, Garhshanker road, one Tata Tempo bearing registration No. P. B.-12b-5346 came from Garhshanker side, which was driven by respondent No.2 in a rash and negligent manner and at a high speed. The said Tempo hit the scooter from back side after taking pass from sham Sharmas motor cycle. As a result, ram Sharma, Smt. Geeta Sharma and Pooja sharma fell on the pucca road and the offending tempo crushed them all. They died at the spot. It was alleged that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No.2. An F. I. R. bearing registration No.56 was registered on the same day i. e.21st September , 2004, under sections 304-A, 427 of I. P. C. at Police Station, nurpur Bedi. The offending vehicles owned by the present appellant.

4. Three claim petitions have been preferred by LRs of Ram Sharma, LRs of smt. Geeta Sharma and mother and father of pooja Sharma.

5. The Insurance Company i. e. New India assurance Company, herein denied its liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. It also denied the accident etc. though, it was admitted that the vehicle in question was insured with it.

6. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed following specific issue.

"whether at the time of accident, respondent No.2 was not holding a valid and effective driving license? If so its effect? O. P. R.-3"

Other issues were also framed regarding entitlement of the claimants for compensation and the factum of accident etc. On the basis of evidence led, the Claim Tribunal ruled that the accident was caused by the driver of the offending vehicle due to rash and negligent driving. Thetribunal also found the entitlement of the claimants for compensation and assessed and determined the compensation in each case. The quantum of compensation etc. is not material for purposes of the present appeals.

7. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, while deciding issue No.2 returned a finding that the driver was not having a valid driving license. It, accordingly, directed the payment of compensation firstly by the Insurance company with a liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. The appellant owner is aggrieved by the direction of the tribunal, where underthe appellant has been made liable to disburse the amount of compensation to the Insurance Company under the Awards.

8. As far the findings recorded by the tribunal on Issue No.2 is concerned, the appellant has not been able to dispute the same. The offending vehicle was being driven by Baldev Singh driver, a copy of his license was produced before the Tribunal as Ext. R-4. Validity of this license was shown up to 13th september 2014, and was allegedly issued on 21st June, 2003. Therefore, this driving license was valid at the time of accident. The Insurance company summoned the record from the office of A. R. T. O. , Muzafarnagar, who is allegedly the Licensing Authority of License no. B4028, a copy where of was produced before the learned Tribunal. Vikas Gaur, Junior clerk from the office of A. R. T. O. Muzafarnagar, produced the record and submitted his report that the driving license No. B-4028 was issued