FAO No.1625 of 2008 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1625 of 2008 Date of Decision:23.07.2010 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Darshna Rani and others .....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Kannan Present: Mr. Jagtar Kureel, Advocate for Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.D. Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4. None for respondents No.5 and 6. ..... K. Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. Insurance Company is in appeal challenging the award on an admitted premise that the vehicle was for commercial purpose and the vehicle was also admitted to be running as a taxi car. The driver was required to have a licence with a transport vehicle endorsement. The same was not done and, therefore, the driver could not be said to possess a valid driving licence. 2. The Tribunal made the insurer liable with only on the ground that if the licence was for transport vehicle, the same should have been produced by the Insurance Company. If the licence did not have the endorsement, then onus to prove shifts either to the owner or to the driver to show that, even apart from the copy of the driving licence, which was available, there was some other document showing that the driver had the authority to drive the transport vehicle. The Insurance Company had shown that there had been a violation of the FAO No.1625 of 2008 2 terms of the policy. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have accepted the contention of the insurer that the insured shall not be entitled to any indemnity. The appeal is allowed to that extent to provide for liability to satisfy the claimants with right of recovery against the insured. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23rd July, 2010 sharmila