F.A.O.NO. 1131 OF 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 1131 OF 2002 Date of decision:28th September, 2010 National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office, SCO No. 332- 334, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through its duly constituted Attorney. .......Appellant Versus Niranjan Singh and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Inderjeet Sharma, 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) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal challenging a direction to the insurer that provided for a right of recovery only against the driver and not against the owner. In my view, when the Court found that the driving licence was fake, the Court could have provided for a right of recovery only against an insurer. The contract of Insurance is between the insurer and the insured only and apart from the policy condition that would expect the insured to entrust the vehicle only to a licenced driver, it could have no contractual obligation between the insurer and the driver. Even otherwise, the F.A.O.NO. 1131 OF 2002 2 insured shall be vicariously liable for the act of the driver workman and in that capacity he is bound to bear the burden. The award granted by the Tribunal providing for a right of recovery against the driver is under circumstances not appropriate and not legally tenable. 2. The award of the Tribunal is modified to provide for a right of recovery to the Insurer against his own insured-owner of the vehicle and the direction for payment against the driver is vacated. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 28th September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik