JUDGMENT :

KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J.

1. Heard Sri. Rishabh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. By way of this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and award dated 10.10.2014 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 8 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in M.A.C. Case No. 66 of 2013 awarding a sum of Rs. 46,282/- with 7% rate of interest.

3. The owner is before this court. My brother while admitting this appeal has relied on the judgment of the this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Mohfooza Begum and Others, 2002 (1) TAC 11 (All.). The claimant is not before this Court.

4. Sri. Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent has conveyed to this Court that the Insurance Company has been exonerated and rightly so. It is contended that xerox copies are not admissible in evidence.

5. As against this, it is an admitted position of fact that civil trappings are not to be strictly followed. The amount awarded is meagre which has already been deposited. The issue before the Tribunal was not that the vehicle was driven by an unauthorized person. Before the Tribunal, license of motor car was already on record. Respondent No. 3 did not produce the original of the driving license. If the Tribunal was of the view that it was either fake or not proper driving license, it should have summoned the R.T.O. concerned and examined the veracity under its plenary jurisdiction is the submission of Sri. Rishabh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant. He relies on the decisions in Rakesh Kumar and Others vs. United India Insurance Company Limited and Others, (2016) 14 SCC 219, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Mahfooza Begum and Others (Supra) and United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Ramashray Chauhan and Another, 2003 SCC Online All 1981.

6. Sri. Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent, has tried to distinguish the aforesaid judgments. However, the Insurance Company's plea was not that it was fake driving license.

7. The appeal is partly allowed in light of the aforesaid decisions. The appellant having already deposited the amount along with interest. The claimants have already been compensated. Sri. Rishabh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant shall send copy of the receipt of amount deposited with the Tribunal to the Insurance Company within four weeks from today. The Insurance Company thereafter shall reimburse the appellant herein within four weeks thereafter.

8. In case of any difficulty, the parties are at liberty to seek revival of this appeal by filing of an application.

9. This Court is thankful to both the advocates for ably assisting the Court.

10. A copy of this order be circulated to all the Tribunals in the State of U.P. so that in future the said mistakes are not committed by the Tribunal.