THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1051 of 2011 Dated: 30-04-2011 Oral Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Insurance Company, the 3rd respondent in MVOP No. 139 of 2008 has filed this revision, aggrieved by the order dated 21-1-2011 of the VI Addl. District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court), Rajahmundry rejecting I.A.No. 59 of 2011. The said application was filed by the revision petitioner, seeking issuance of summons to the R.T.A. to produce the driving licence of the driver of the vehicle-the 2nd respondent involved in the accident in which the 1st respondent was injured. The vehicle is owned by the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the revision petitioner that the 2nd respondent does not have a driving licence. I.A.No. 59 of 2011 was rejected by the court below by the order impugned holding that it is the obligation of the petitioner to obtain the information as to the existence or otherwise of the driving licence through electronic accessing or some other method and it is not in public interest to issue summons to the R.T.A. in each and every case to produce the driving licence and such course would impede the efficiency of the R.T.A. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the discretion exercised by the court below. If it is the case of the revision petitioner- insurance company that the 2nd respondent herein, the driver of the vehicle did not possess a driving licence it may assert the same in its defence/counter/written statement in the MVOP. In such an event, the burden will fall on the owner of the vehicle and the driver who are also respondents in the MVOP to prove that there was a valid driving licence and in the event of not having a driving licence, the respondents will be mulcted with the liability of compensation for the accident. This Court confirms the view expressed in the order impugned that summoning the R.T.A to produce the driving licence in every case would adversely impact the efficient official functions of the R.T.A., having regard to the large number of motor accident cases and since the insurance company has an effective and alternative means to secure that information. On the above premise, there are no merits in the revision and it is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 30th April, 2011. GRR