( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed by the Insurance company against the award of compensation by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims tribunal, Vijayawnda in MVOP No. 131 of 2000 dated 31-1-2002. ( 2 ) THE main grievance of the appellant- insurance company is that the learned District judge without recording a finding and without looking into the documents filed by it into the Court as additional evidence to prove that the policy under which the owner of the vehicle is claiming that the vehicle involved in the accident is covered by a fake insurance policy. ( 3 ) I have gone through the order of the tribunal. During the pendency of the O. P. the insurance company filed an application to receive certain documents to prove that the policy under which the owner of the vehicle is claiming that his vehicle is covered by a fake policy. The learned Judge simply directed the said application to be called along with the main O. P. Ultimately, the o. P. was disposed of by an order dated 31- 10-2002 without looking into the said application seeking to receive additional documents and that too on mere surmises and conjunctures by commenting that certain pages of the documents which were sought to be looked into were missing for which there is absolutely no basis. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company submits that the material required to prove that the policy in question is a fake policy were filed in the Court below but the Court below recorded a finding otherwise, on the sole ground that the entire register in tact was not filed. Unfortunately, the insurance company also has not taken diligent care in examining one of their senior officers in support of their contention. ( 5 ) INITIALLY, the insurance company examined one of its officers to speak that the vehicle is not covered by a valid policy. Subsequently it contested the claim by stating that the vehicle is not covered by valid policy and that the policy on which the owner is placing reliance is a fake one. But at the same time, the company did not choose to file any documents in support of its contention. In fact, the company did not chose to file the documents when the officer of the company was examined. But at the same time, the company did not choose to file any documents in support of its contention. In fact, the company did not chose to file the documents when the officer of the company was examined. After the arguments are over in the case, the insurance company filed the two applications to receive certain documents as additional evidence to prove that the policy produced by the owner of the vehicle is a fake policy. The learned Judge without passing any orders on the said applications simply directed the said applications to be posted along with the main O. P. and he delivered the judgment without reference to the additional documents. ( 6 ) IT is better to speak less about the advocates, who are appearing for the governmental organizations, who are not taking even minimum care to protect the interest of their clients. When the insurance company has taken a plea that the policy produced was a fake policy, a duty is cast on its counsel to advise the company that the relevant documents have to be filed before the issues are settled or at any rate before the trial commences. Unfortunately, that was not done. In fact, in most of the claim petitions, no person will be examined on behalf of the insurance company having filed counters opposing the claim on various grounds with the result the interest of the insurance companies are suffering very badly and it is not uncommon to hear that even fake claims are being entertained by the Courts because of their attitude and compensations are being awarded in lakhs of rupees as the counsel appearing for the companies invariably do not take even the minimum professional care to protect the interest of the companies thereby public monies. ( 7 ) IN this case after the entire case is over, i. e. trial and arguments are over, the company filed applications requesting the Court to receive certain documents as additional evidence to prove that the policy in questions is a fake one. If the same is allowed, the learned Judge is bound to give an opportunity to the other side to accept or deny the allegation of the insurance company. If the same is allowed, the learned Judge is bound to give an opportunity to the other side to accept or deny the allegation of the insurance company. On the said applications, the learned Judge simply passed docket order post along with the main O. P. and while pronouncing the orders, he did not say even a single word about the said documents except commenting that the extract of insurance premium register filed in the Court do not contain certain pages. The counsel for the insurance company contends that the relevant pages pertaining to prove that the policy in question is a fake one were filed and that the insurance company is not under an obligation to file the entire register before the Court. ( 8 ) IT is not known how the learned Judge can make such a comment without coming to the conclusion that the pages that were found missing have any relevance to the issue under controversy. Likewise, I do not know how the Court allowed the xerox copies of the register to be filed into the Court without filing the original register for verification. Of late, we are seeing that the courts below started giving a go bye to the procedural rules, may be because of ignorance or lethargy and at times they are allowing certain grave irregularities to take place. In the normal course, for the failure on the part of the insurance company to prove its case at the appropriate time, I would have dismissed the appeal. But in the present day context where fraud is becoming universal phenomenon and omnipotent to loot the public exchequer, I am inclined to give an opportunity to the insurance company to prove its case by remanding the matter for fresh trial after giving opportunity to both the parties to prove their respective cases in accordance with law. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned order. The matter is remanded back to the Court below for fresh trial. Since the accident is of the year 1999, the Tribunal shall dispose of the O. P. within 3 months from the date of receipt of papers from this Court. If the parties file any application for amendment of their pleadings in support of their case, the trial Court may allow the same and dispose of the matter as directed.