F.A.O.NO. 2987 OF 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 2987 OF 2004 Date of decision:27th September, 2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd., having its regional office at SCO 332-34, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through Shri Subhash Chander Sharma, Asstt. Manager, duly constituted attorney. .......Appellant Versus Subash Chander and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Paul S.Saini, 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 the liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The Tribunal found that the licence to be valid by the reason that there had been renewals which were shown to be valid. On the other hand, the Insurance Company had produced the evidence from the DTO, Jalandhar who gave evidence to the effect that the particular licence number with the copy of the licence produced by the driver, showed that the licence had been issued in the name of the driver F.A.O.NO. 2987 OF 2004 2 only. However, evidence of RW-2 who was the clerk of the DTO Kanpur which was the original place of issue of the licence, gave evidence with reference to the register that showed that the licence against Entry no. 4898 was in the name of one Kulwant Singh of Kapurthala and not in the name of driver of the vehicle Jagjit Malhotra. The renewal which had been carried out at their own office was in the name of Jagjit Singh son of Udham Singh and was not in the name of Jagjit Singh son of Darshan Singh. Evidently, it was a case where the original licence was fake but renewals have been obtained subsequently, by the driver. In such a situation the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United India Insurance v. Davinder Singh(2007) 8 SCC 342, has held that even if the renewal is genuine but the original issue of licence has proved to be fake, it would be fake. 2. The award of the Tribunal is modified to provide for right of recovery against the owner of the insured/owner involved in the accident. The award stands modified and the appeal stands allowed in the above extent. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 27th September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik