IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1450 of 1991 (O&M) Date of decision:27.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Kaila 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. The Insurance Company is in appeal challenging liability on the ground that of the two co-owners of the vehicle, only one had been impleaded and another was not. It was further contended that the driving licence was fake and a report had also been produced but that was not acted upon. 2. While the law is well established that an insured is always a necessary party and the insurer cannot be made liable without making the insured a party, the position must be understood as making possible for an insurer liable even in cases where one of the co-owners is a party. A FAO No.1450 of 1991 (O&M) - 2 - co-owner invariably acts on behalf of another and a representation of one must be taken as a representation on behalf of other also. As regards the contention that the driver did not have a valid driving licence, the mere production of a report from a licensing authority shall not be sufficient. It would require to be proved in the manner known to law. The liability cast on the insurer in a case where no proof is adduced that the driver did not have a valid driving licence cannot, therefore, be faulted. 3. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 27.09.2010 sanjeev