F.A.O.NO. 4096 OF 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 4096 OF 2002 Date of decision:27th July, 2010 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. .......Appellant Versus Mrs. Shakuntla Devi and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) The Insurance Company is in appeal contending that the Tribunal did not give sufficient opportunity to summon the driver to prove that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The Insurer's duty shall always be to show that there had been a breach of the term of the policy. If its contention was that the driver did not have a valid driving licence, then minimum it should have served a notice on the insured or his driver to cause the production of the driving licence. If a case is closed for evidence and the insurer moves an application for summoning the driver when the insurer had not at any time during the pendency of the proceedings sought for the production of the F.A.O.NO. 4096 OF 2002 2 document, the Tribunal had exercised its discretion correctly in declining the prayer for summoning the driver. I find no error in the approach of the Tribunal. The appeal is dismissed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 27th July, 2010 Shivani Kaushik