FAO NO. 1440 OF 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO NO. 1440 OF 1996 DECIDED ON 29.6.2010. New India Assurance Co. -----Appellant Vs. Smt. Devi and others -------Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present:- Mr. L. M. Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellant. *** K. Kannan, J (Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal against the award passed against him on the ground that the driver had only the Light Motor Vehicle licence when he was actually driving a Heavy Motor Vehicle. He had produced a copy of licence, which, according to the driver bore a tick mark against possession of a licence for Heavy Motor Vehicle. In the cross examination of the driver, it had been only suggested to him that he did not have a Heavy Motor Vehicle and he had merely qualified for driving Light Motor Vehicle. The Tribunal found on examination of the document that it was not too clear whether the Heavy Vehicle had been struck off or tick marked and it had also observed that there was no pointed cross examination to the witness that the word Heavy Vehicle had not been mentioned. The Insurance Company that had a defence that the driver did FAO NO. 1440 OF 1996 2 not have a heavy motor vehicle licence ought to put by way of suggestion its defence. The Tribunal was correct in making an inference that even in the light of such a line of cross examination, it was not possible to accept the contention that the driver did not have a licence for driving a heavy motor vehicle. Learned Senior counsel wants me to examine the record produced before the Court. 2. I have also seen the documents produced and it is not possible to make an inference whether Heavy Motor Vehicle is ticked or not. If there was a doubt, the burden was on the Insurance Company to prove that there had been a breach and if the copy of the licence had been produced and there existed a doubt, the Insurance Company ought to have taken steps to produce the original register from the Transport Authority to test the nature of licence that had been issued to the driver. The Insurance Company had not discharged the burden which was on it. The award passed against the Insurance Company under the circumstances, cannot be assailed and the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. 29.06.2010 ( K.KANNAN ) mamta JUDGE