IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2083 of 1994 Date of decision:28.06.2010 The New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Harpreet Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 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 appeal by the Insurance Company challenges the liability cast on the insurer for what it considered as a valid defence by attempting to state that the renewal of the licence had been made with reference to a fake licence. The Tribunal had held that in a claim by a 3rd party, the Insurance Company was bound to establish that such a renewal was with reference to a fake licence and it was seen that the licence had been originally issued by the licencing authority, Hyderabad Central Zone, Sirsa, in the year 1991. A report by an Insurance Company itself that the licence was fake or the endorsement was fake would not conclude the issue for a 3rd party or for the Insurance Company to FAO No.2083 of 1994 -2 - exclude its liability. If the Insurance Company had not taken steps to secure primary evidence from the registers available at the licencing authority, Hyderabad and show that a particular licence number produced before the Court belonged to somebody else or there was no such licence number in the original records of the licencing authority, it could not be said that the Insurance Company had discharged its burden of proof. 2. The reasoning of the Tribunal is correct and no interference is warranted. The appeal is dismissed. There shall be however no directions as to costs. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 28.06.2010 sanjeev