IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.6871 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:04.05.2011 Surjeet ...Appellant versus Khuswant Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the appellant. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) The Tribunal found the original issue of licence was fake although renewals of licences shown had been shown to have been taken in the name of Surjeet. The Insurance Company proved the fake character of the original issue of licence by examining a Clerk from the licencing authority that was the office of the first issue. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the owner/driver argues that it was the duty of the Government to see the validity of the licence and its genuineness before renewal is effected. This argument cannot avail to an owner/driver, who had perpetrated a fraud in bringing about a document which was established to be fake. Unless the owner himself had a case to contend that he believed that the driving licence produced by the FAO No.6871 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - driver to be genuine, there is no way that the owner can protect himself and defeat the right of an Insurance Company to plead that the owner had been guilty of violation of terms of the policy. The liability cast on the owner/driver is, under the circumstances, justified and I find no reason to disagree with the finding rendered by the Tribunal. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 04.05.2011 sanjeev