THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.NOS.3275 & 3276 OF 2011 COMMON JUDGMENT:- Both appeals are ﬁled by the Insurance Company questioning its liability fastened in O.P.Nos.90 and 91 of 2002 on the ﬁle of the Court of Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Case-cum-Additional Family Court-cum-XXIII Additional Chief Judge, Red Hills, Nampally at Hyderabad. A claim for compensation of Rs.3 lakhs and 2 lakhs respectively was made for the injuries received by the petitioners in a motor accident that occurred on 16-11-2001 at about 4.00 P.M. On the said date while the petitioners were proceeding on a scooter bearing No.AP9AG 7683 from Vattinagulapally to the diary form and when the scooter reached at R&B Road, one tipper bearing No.ADT-98 coming from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with a high speed and hit against the scooter, as a result of which, both petitioners were sustained injuries. The Insurance Company contended that the driver of the oﬀending vehicle was not having a valid subsisting licence and the claim for compensation is excessive one and untenable. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has ﬁxed compensation of Rs.45,000/- in O.P.No.90 of 2002 and a sum of Rs.18,000/- in O.P.No.91 of 20002 and directed the Insurance Company to pay and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. Now the point that arises for consideration is:- Whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation? POINT:- The factum of insurance of the vehicle is not in dispute but the contention is that by the date of incident, the driver of the tipper was not having licence. In support of it, the investigation is said to have been conducted and the particulars of the licence of the driver was only valid up to 21-11-1994. Ex.B-2 is the certiﬁcate obtained from the Regional Transport Authority dated.25-02-2004 to that eﬀect. Therefore, the licence of the driver has expired long prior to the incident. There is nothing on record that the driver has applied for the renewal. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, it is quite clear by the date of incident, the driver was not having any valid licence since it has expired years back and consequently the decision relied on by the lower Tribunal has no application to the facts of the case. It has been held in National India Insurance Company Vs. Swaran Singh and others( [1] ) that in case if the driver of the vehicle was not having any licence at all, there is no liability to pay even to the third parties by the Insurance Company. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the Insurance Company cannot be held liable and the above decision has been followed subsequently in several other decisions. Therefore, both appeals are allowed and the appellant in both appeals is exonerated from liability and the award amounts have to be recovered from the owner of the vehicle. _______________________ N.R.L. NĀGESWARA RĀO,J 07-12-2011 TSNR [1] (2004) 3 SCC 297