IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2048 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision:28.09.2010 II. FAO No.2049 of 1997 (O&M) National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Sarishta Rani and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present: Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal in both the cases to contend for the position that the driver had been directed to produce the driving licence through an application filed at the Tribunal but he responded with his inability to produce the same. In spite of the non- production of the document of the licence, the Tribunal had erroneously found that the insurer had not established the burden of proof that the driver was not duly licensed. The duty to produce a driving licence on demand is secured statutorily through Section 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act. If the document is not produced in spite of demand, an adverse FAO No.2048 of 1997 (O&M) - 2 - inference shall be drawn that the driver did not have a driving licence. The owner himself gave no evidence about the possession of the driving licence of the driver. 2. The award of the Tribunal would, therefore, be required to be modified to find that the owner was guilty of violation of terms of the policy and provide to the insurer a right of recovery after satisfying the claim of the claimants. 3. The appeals are allowed to the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 28.09.2010 sanjeev