FAO No.1665 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1665 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision. 09.03.2011 New India Assurance Company Ltd. Jalandhar Road, Batala through Sh. K.B. Bindal, New India Assurance Company Ltd., Regional Office, SCO No.36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Sukhwinder Kaur widow of Harjit Singh and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Manmohan Singh, Advocate for Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is by the insurance company challenging the award even in cases where on proof of the fact that the driver's licence was fake, a right of recovery had been granted against the owner insured. It was an appropriate relief, which the Tribunal has granted in tune with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh (2004) 3 SCC 297. The insurance company must have been satisfied with the award when it had the benefit of recovery but it is in appeal before this Court challenging the status of the deceased as a person in police force. 2. The evidence was adduced before the Tribunal that he drew his salary from the police department and a salary certificate had also FAO No.1665 of 2011 (O&M) -2- been produced. The insurance company would state that there was no proof that he was a Constable. It is not understandable as to what nature of proof would be necessary in proceedings before the Tribunal when the status of a person is set out in the claim petition and the salary certificate is also produced before the Tribunal. If there was a doubt about the status of the person as a Police Constable, the insurance company ought to have produced some evidence through some investigation or report that the deceased was not working in the Police Department and the claimants were trying to fake an employment status. When no evidence was produced by the insurance company, it is an irresponsible act on the part of the insurance company in challenging the issue of employment status and the quantum of award passed by the Tribunal. 3. The appeal is dismissed with costs assessed at Rs.15,000/- to be paid by the appellant-insurance company to the Chandigarh Legal Services Authority. A copy of this order is sent to the Member, Chandigarh Legal Services Authority to claim costs which is ordered by this Court. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 09, 2011 Pankaj*