FAO No.2234 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2234 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: 13.8.2009 National Insurance Co. Ltd. ......Appellants(s) Versus Balbir Kaur w/o Narinder Singh and others ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the appellant. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. This is insurer's appeal challenging the award of the Tribunal whereby claim petition filed by the respondent-claimants has been accepted and a sum of Rs.7,23,880/- has been awarded as compensation on account of death of Narinder Singh in a motor vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. As per the pleadings, the appellant had contested the claim petition on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. However, the Tribunal while passing the impugned award held under issue No.2 that the appellant- Insurance Company remained unsuccessful to prove that Rachpal Singh driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. In this appeal, challenging the aforesaid finding of the Tribunal, learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the findings of the Tribunal on this issue are against the evidence on record as the FAO No.2234 of 2009(O&M) 2 Insurance Company examined Smt. Savinder Kaur, Junior Assistant in the office of DTO, Amritsar who categorically stated that the Driving Licence No.7386-ASR was not issued in favour of Sh. Rachpal Singh and as per the record brought by her the same stands issued in the name of one Sh. Bachittar Singh. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, she further deposed that even the original licence was valid upto 18.1.1994 only but the Tribunal has ignored the material evidence on record while returning the findings against the appellant and therefore, the same are liable to be set aside. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record of this appeal. Undisputedly, the driving licence of Rachpal Singh was exhibited on criminal file brought by RW-2 Bhaskara Anand, Criminal Ahlmad in the court of CJM, Kapurthala who deposed that the driving licence bearing No.7386/ASR was issued in favour of Rachpal Singh son of Wassan Singh, driver of the offending vehicle on 19.1.1989 and as per entry, the licence was valid upto 19.5.2011. It is also relevant to mention that Savinder Kaur RW-3 on whose testimony the appellant has relied upon, was re-examined subsequently when she produced records regarding driving licence, who deposed that the said licence was issued in favour of Rachpal Singh, driver of the offending vehicle and was valid upto 18.1.1994. It is also relevant to mention that in her cross-examination, the aforesaid witness has clearly stated that she had brought only record of licence No.7386/ASR and the record regarding the renewal of the licence was not with this record. She also stated that the licence bearing No.7386- ASR which is on the criminal file record has not been brought by her. She has also stated in her testimony that the licences are issued initially for a period of five years. Not only this, the aforesaid witness on whose FAO No.2234 of 2009(O&M) 3 testimony reliance has been placed by the appellant was declared hostile by the Insurance Company and was cross-examined. From the aforesaid discussion, the stand taken by the appellant is clearly belied. Moreover, the appellant in this appeal is relying upon the testimony of a witness whose trustworthiness was challenged by the appellant itself. Not only this, admittedly the appellant-Company has paid the claim of damages to the offending vehicle on the basis of surveyor's report who in his report RW1/1 & RW1/2 had not disputed the correctness of the driving licence of Rachpal Singh. Even in his cross-examination RW1 Vimal Kapoor, Asstt. Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd., Amritsar has admitted that the surveyor verified the licence of driver shown to him in the claim case. Thus, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the Tribunal to the effect that the appellant failed to prove that Rachpal Singh, driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid and effective licence on the date of accident. No merit. Dismissed. August 13, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE FAO No.2234 of 2009(O&M) 4