FAO No.902 of 1996 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.902 of 1996 Date of Decision. 16.09.2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Faridabad through Shri R.C. Gupta, Admn. Officer, Regional Office, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Vivek Bhagat son of Raghunath Lal Bhagat and others ......Respondents 2. C.R. NO.2596 of 1996 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Faridabad through Shri R.C. Gupta, Admn. Officer, Regional Office, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Rajeev Bhaskar son of Brij Bhushan Bhaskar and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Inderjit Singh, Advocate for Mr. Pradeep Bedi, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.P. Singh, Advocate for Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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 contention of the insurer in appeal is that the driver did not have a valid driving licence and therefore, the insurance company could not have been made liable. In support of its FAO No.902 of 1996 -2- contention, the evidence was led by the insurer from the RTA, Ganganagar to show that the particular licence number, which the copy contained, did not refer to a driver of the offending vehicle and the driving licence was not genuine. The Tribunal, therefore, found that there had been subsequent renewals of the fake licence and relying on a judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sucha Singh and others 1994(1) PLR 140 (P&H) held that in view of such renewal, the original licence shall also be taken to be true. This proposition conflicts with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United Indian Insurance v Divinder Singh (2007) 8 SCC 342 that a renewal of a fake driving licence is no licence at all and hence the insurer shall not be liable. 2. It will, therefore, be taken as established that the driver did not have a valid driving licence and the owner had committed a breach of the terms of policy. The liability of the insurer shall be only to satisfy the claim of the claimants and to recover the same against the insured. 3. The award of the Tribunal is modified and the appeals are allowed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 16, 2010 Pankaj*