F.A.O.NO. 309 OF 2000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 309 OF 2000 Date of decision:25th August, 2010 The New India Assurance Company Ltd. .......Appellant Versus Roop Chand and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respodents. 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 in spite of the fact that the driving licence produced by the driver was proved to be fake by examining the clerk of the Licence Issuing Authority, the insurance company has not even been provided with a right of recovery against the insured. It has came on record through evidence of Devinder Kumar RW-2 that the particular Licence No. contained in licence produced by the driver namely 2018/DTO/BTI/90 had been issued in the name of Gurmail Singh and not in the name of Satpal Singh the driver of the vehicle. The Tribunal reasoned that this will not help the Insurance F.A.O.NO. 309 OF 2000 2 Company to deny liability to the insurer. While the point of law taken by the Tribunal is correct, in so far as satisfying the liability of the claimant, the Tribunal ought to have seen that there is no duty to indemnify the insured, if he had committed the breach of terms of the policy. The driver had appeared and produced the copy with respect to which the evidence was given. The owner himself had not been examined to speak about his own belief that the driving licence was true. In the cross examination, it had been confronted to RW-2 whether he would be in a position to deny the licence of the driver to be fake and he has said that it shall not be possible for him. The statement seen in isolation may suggest that the Insurance Company had not proved that the licence was fake but reading the evidence on the whole, when the register had been produced and entry in the register against particular licence number of the driver, had been issued to some other person, the burden of proof must be held to be duly discharged. 2. The Insurer's liability shall be only to satisfy the claim of the claimant but it shall have a right of recovery against the insured. The award of the Tribunal is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 25th August, 2010 Shivani Kaushik