FAO No.499 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.499 of 1998 Date of Decision. 30.06.2010 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., through its Divisional Manager, Sirsa ........Appellant Versus Sukhvinder Kaur and others ...Respondents Present: Mr.Vinod Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. J.S. Thind, 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 point that arises for consideration in the appeal is the liability of the insurance company in a case where licence had expired at the time of the accident and the renewal was done subsequently, more than 30 days from the date when the licence was due for renewal. The Tribunal awarded the compensation against the insurance company on a reasoning that when there was a renewal although subsequently would still be liable. The effect of delayed renewal and the liability of the insurance company has come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Vidya Dhar Mahrawali (2008) 4 PLR FAO No.499 of 1998 -2- 746 when the Court held that insurance company would not be liable under such a circumstance. In this case it is found that the driver's licence was due for a renewal in the year 1986 and the accident had taken place on 07.07.1995. The licence produced in the Court showed that the renewal had been made on 18.10.1995 more than 9 years after the date when the licence was due for the renewal and under such a circumstance, the insurance company cannot be made liable but the entitlement of the claimant to secure the amount against the insurance company shall not in any way be affected. The right of recovery alone shall be available for the insurance company against the insured. 2. The award of the Tribunal is, therefore, modified for the liability to subsist in favour of the claimants but a right of recovery shall be available for the insurer against the insured for the breach of condition in the policy. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. No costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE June 30, 2010 Pankaj*