FAO No.218 of 1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.218 of 1994 Date of Decision. 06.08.2010 New India Assurance Co. Ltd., SCO No.36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh through its duly constituted attorney ......Appellant Versus Nirmal Kaur widow of Mohinder Singh, aged 44 years, resident of village Dulandi, Tehsil Balachaur, Distt. Hoshiarpur and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. L.M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. 2. FAO No.160 of 1994 Nirmal Kaur widow of Mohinder Singh r/o village Oladni, Tehsil Balachaur, District Hoshiarpur and others ......Appellants Versus Jaspal Singh son of Sohan Singh (driver of Truck No.MP-23-B-4997), resident of village Bagwain P.S and Tehsil Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur and others ......Respondents Present: None for the appellant. Mr. L.M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the insurance company. 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 only point for consideration in the appeal in FAO FAO No.218 of 1994 -2- No.218 of 1994 is the liability of the insurer when the driver did not have a valid driving licence. In this case, the accident took place on 12.06.1991 but the licence issued and produced before the Court showed that it had expired on 01.10.1990 and renewal was made only subsequent to the accident on 26.06.1991. In such a situation, it shall not be permissible to cast the liability on the insurer without providing for a right of recovery against the insured. The case has been so answered by several decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and particularly in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Vidya Dhar Mahariwala 2008(4) PLR 746 and National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Jarnail Singh 2007(15) SCC 28. 2. The insurance company shall still be liable to satisfy the claims of the claimants but it shall have the right of recovery against the insured. The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. 3. As regards the claim for enhancement in FAO No.160 of 1994, I find that the evidence placed by the claimants was that the deceased was employed as a security guard earning a salary of Rs.800/- per month. The Tribunal took the contribution to the family as Rs.700/- per month. The annual dependence was ascertained as Rs.8400/- and adopted a multiplier of 16. The deceased was aged 44 years and even the choice of multiplier was high. I do not think any case could be made out for enhancement. 4. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 06, 2010 Pankaj*