FAO No.74 of 1995 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.74 of 1995 Date of Decision. 31.08.2010 The New India Assurance Company, SCO 36-37, Sector 17, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Smt. Parkash Kaur widow and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. L.M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. R.M Suri, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Ms. Manpreet Kaur, Advocate for Ms. Lisa Gill, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 and 7. 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 insurance company is on appeal challenging the liability on the ground that the driving licence produced by the driver was fake. Before the trial, the original records had been sent for and a clerk from the Licensing Authority was also examined to show that the licence No.S-6837 had been issued in the name of some other person than the driver. The Tribunal rejected the evidence on the ground that the copy of the licence produced before the Tribunal by the driver referred to No.6347 and the evidence had been rendered with reference to 6847. I have also seen the copy of FAO No.74 of 1995 -2- the document and I have no doubt in my mind that it refers only to 6847 in respect which evidence had been tendered by the insurer. 2. The Tribunal also adopted another reasoning that the insurer had satisfied an OD Claim by the insured, which according to it, was proof that the insurer had admitted the tenability of the insured to make a claim to it. It has been elicited through the evidence of RW-3 that this satisfaction of the claim itself was reopened and it is a subject matter of civil suit on the ground that it was obtained by suppression of material facts. 3. The award of the Tribunal, therefore, finding that the driving licence was not shown to be fabricated is set aside. The insurance company shall be liable to satisfy only the claimant and it will have a right of recovery against the insured-owner. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent and the appeal is allowed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 31, 2010 Pankaj*