FAO No.3 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3 of 1998 Date of Decision. 05.08.2010 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., having its regional office at Sector 8, Chandigarh through Sh.R.C. Bansal, Asstt. Manager duly constituted attorney ......Appellant Versus Pala Singh son of Chajju Singh and others ......Respondents 2. FAO No.4 of 1998 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., having its regional office at Sector 8, Chandigarh through Sh.R.C. Bansal, Asstt. Manager duly constituted attorney ......Appellant Versus Chhaju Singh son of Mushi Singh and others ......Respondents 3. FAO No.5 of 1998 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., having its regional office at Sector 8, Chandigarh through Sh.R.C. Bansal, Asstt. Manager duly constituted attorney ......Appellant Versus Gurdev Kaur wife of Mukand Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for the appellant. None 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 insurance company is in appeal pleading for exclusion of liability on the ground that the licence is proved to be fake but still the owner has been provided with full indemnity. According to the insurer, there had been a deliberate breach on the part of the FAO No.3 of 1998 -2- owner/insured in entrusting the vehicle to a person, who did not have a valid driving licence. Although the insurer had the benefit of securing a report of local commissioner that the driving licence was not genuine, the owner himself had given evidence before the Tribunal to the effect that he had verified the licence of the driver. There was a further evidence that the driver had been serving him for more than 2 years but after the accident, he had left the service. He had also given evidence to the effect that he saw the licence before appointing him and it may have appeared that the licence had been issued by licensing authority, Guwahati. The belief of the owner-insured that the licence produced by the driver was genuine is good enough to infer that the insured had not committed any deliberate breach of the terms of the policy. The Tribunal has observed that he had not taken steps to verify the licence from licensing authority, Guwahati or the DTO office at Hoshiarpur. Such a verification is not merely unnatural but against the grain of normal human conduct. The Tribunal has apportioned the liability between the insurer and the owner as 75:25. The insurance company must have been made to pay the entire amount and protected the insured's right to be fully indemnified. 2. All the three appeals filed by the insurance company are dismissed but still the awards are moeified to make the insurer fully liable for the claims. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 05, 2010 Pankaj*