TMs appeal is from a judgment against tie appellant insurance company for tie amount of a policy it iad issued upon tie life of Aniceto V. Mata, for tie ienefit of iis wife, Dolores L. Mata, appellee ierein. Tie policy belonged to tie class inown generally as “industrial policies.”

Tie jury 'found, upon sufficient evidence, tiat all premiums iad been paid on tie policy up to tie time of tie deati of tie insured, but appellant resisted tie suit upon tie ground tiat sucb payments iad not been entered in tie “premium receipt book,” as required by a provision in tie policy, tiat “no payment of tie premium to an agent siall bind the company or be of any force, effect or validity, unless such agent on date of payment of each premium, made proper entry and sign for same in tie premium receipt book belonging to and bearing the same name and number as this policy.”

Tie evidence shows tiat, up to within a short time before tie insured’s deati, tie premiums iad been paid to appellant’s agent in person in San Antonio, who properly noted such payments in tie receipt book. Tie insured’s family then moved to Uvalde, after which tie premiums were paid by mail. This method of payment resulted in tie omission of tie entries in tie receipt book. Appellant now urges this omission as a complete bar to recovery upon tie policy, notwithstanding tie full and timely payment of premiums.

Tie use of tie premium receipt book no doubt furnishes a convenient and accurate method of bookkeeping between, insured and insurer, but no court of justice will lend its aid to the unconscionable doctrine tiat tie mere failure of tie insurer to make such entries when premiums axe timely paid siall work a forfeiture of tie beneficiary’s right to collect tie amount of tie policy upon tie deati of the insured. Federal Life Ins. Co. v. Sweeney (Tex. Civ. App.) 18 S.W.(2d) 702. We overrule appellant’s propositions I and II.

Appellant’s remaining propositions present no reversible error, and tie judgment is affirmed.