Judgment The United India Insurance Company questions the award OF compensation on the ground of liability as well as quantum. 2. The facts are some what unusual. On 12.04.2000, when the fifth respondent was riding his two-wheeler, keeping his wife as pillion-rider, an accident took place. She was thrown out. She died. The evidence of P.W.2 disclosed that it is because of her husband's negligent riding. There was no contra evidence. 3. On the death of their mother, her sons and daughter have claimed compensation. Totally, they were awarded Rs.3,50,000/-. 4. Mr. S. Arunkumar, learned counsel for the appellant contended that at the time of accident, the fifth respondent, the rider of the insured bike was not having a valid driving licence. A letter to that effect issued by the concerned Transport Authority has been produced. He further contended that the claimants are major. They cannot be dependents of the deceased. 5. Mr. K. Shivakumar, learned counsel for the first respondent on perusing the letter of the Regional Transport Authority did not deny that the fifth respondent was then not having a valid driving license. But, he would submit that even then 'pay and recover' direction can be issued. 6. In reply, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that this is not a fit case for issuing such a direction. It would be incongrous for the insurance company to pay the amount to the sons and daughter and recover the same from their father viz., the fifth respondent. 7. Mr. Shivakumar replied that in the matter of money son and father are different. Money makes many things. Friends also becomes foes. So, the sons and father are pitted against each other. 8. I have considered the rival arguments, perused the materials on record and the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. 9. Indeed, it is a curious case. But, application of law is not based on any curiosity. It should be based on facts, evidence and law. 10. In the facts and circumstances, I am convinced that the Insurance Company could not able to produce the R.T.O's letter regarding fifth respondent's driving license and the policy before the Tribunal. They were now produced. Their authenticity is not disputed by the claimants. They are necessary to pronounce judgment in this appeal. So, to render justice, they are needed. Any technicality shall not stand in the way of doing complete justice. They were now produced. Their authenticity is not disputed by the claimants. They are necessary to pronounce judgment in this appeal. So, to render justice, they are needed. Any technicality shall not stand in the way of doing complete justice. In the circumstances, we receive them as Ex.R1 and Ex.R2. 11. On going through the documents relating to the income of the deceased, so far as the quantum is concerned, there is nothing to interfere here. 12. The claimants are major sons and daughter of the deceased. Neither in the counter of the Insurance Company nor in the evidence, there is any indication that they were not dependent on the deceased. It is not uncommon that some times major sons and daughters are depending on their parents income. The deceased lived with the claimants. She had contributed her income to the family that had gone to the benefit of the claimants. Now, because of the sudden demise of the deceased they were deprived of it. So, they are affected. So, they can claim compensation on her death. 13. The accident was on 12.04.2000. Ex.R1 letter shows that the rider of the bike viz., R5 Selvadurai, husband of the deceased was issued with driving license only on 21.01.2001. So, on the date of accident he was not having valid driving license. But, he is not a claimant in this case. He is first respondent in the claim petition and was pittied against the claimants, who are his sons and daughter. So far as the claimants are concerned, they are concerned with the doings and misdoings of their father/5th respondent. In the facts and circumstances, direction for "pay and recover" can be issued. 14. In the result, the award of the Tribunal is upheld with modification. The appellant shall pay the entire amount to the claimants and recover it from the 5th respondent. The appellant can initiate execution proceedings as against the 5th respondent before a competent Court and take all necessary action available under Order 21 C.P.C. Inasmuch as the entire amount has been deposited by the appellant, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount less amount, if any already withdrawn. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.