IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.194 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision:23.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Ram Kumar and others ...Respondents II. FAO No.195 of 2005 (O&M) National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Anil Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.L.M.Suri, Senior Advocate, with 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. In both the cases, the Insurance Company is in appeal challenging liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. It was proved at the trial during the evidence of RW2- Hans Raj from the licensing authority to show that the driver had only a driving licence to drive a motorcycle and a scooter and the vehicle FAO No.194 of 2005 (O&M) - 2 - involved in the accident was a car. The suggestion in the cross- examination was that there had been an endorsement for LMV also in the licence and a register had not been brought. The suggestion was obviously not correct, for, if there was such an endorsement nothing prevented the owner/driver of the car to produce such a licence. The driver was not duly licensed and, therefore, the Insurance Company cannot be left without providing for a right of recovery from the owner of the car after satisfying the claim of the claimants. The awards of the Tribunal are modified providing for a right of recovery against the owner and the appeals are allowed on the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23.09.2010 sanjeev