IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.499 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision 14.09.2009 The new India Assurance Company ...... Appellant VERSUS Mrs.Avinash Kumari and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.R.K.Bashamboo, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.G.S.Jagpal, Advocate, for Mr.R.S.Bajaj, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.Amit Dhawan, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): Respondents No.3 and 4 have been served through substituted served. As such, service is complete. This appeal, preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company, is directed against the order dated 04.05.2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.4,20,000/- in favour of the claimants-respondents No.1 and 2 (herein referred as 'the claimants') on account of the death of Surinder Kumar, aged about 50 years, in a motor vehicular accident and against the appellant- Insurance Company and respondents No.3 to 5 jointly and severally. The objection raised by the appellant-insurance company is that respondent No.2 Kirpal Singh, driver of truck bearing registration No.PB- 08-D-5355 was not holding a valid driving licence, therefore, the rights of recovery should have been given to the appellant-insurance company.to recover the amount of compensation (paid to the claimants) from respondents No.3 and 4. The other objection raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that since the respondents had failed to produce the route permit and fitness certificate, therefore, the respondent-owner, having committed violation of the policy, company was not liable. Civil Revision No.499 of 2008 (O&M) -2- Heard. The onus to prove the aforesaid issues was upon the appellant but none has put in appearance to shift the onus. Even the driver and owner of the offending truck have not been summoned to produce the documents. As such, the onus cannot be said to have been shifted. No other argument has been raised. As such, finding no merit in this appeal, the same is dismissed. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 14.09.2009 mamta-II