IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2783 of 1999 Date of decision:20.07.2010 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Narender Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. V. Ramswaroop, 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 Insurance Company is in appeal contending that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. In this case, it is contended by the learned counsel that the driver had only a licence to drive a car, motorcycle and jeep but he was driving a mini bus. The policy of insurance shows that the vehicle was insured as a commercial vehicle to carry passengers. Evidently if it was a transport vehicle, as per Section 3, the transport vehicle endorsement should have been there. In this case, the licence did have the transport vehicle endorsement but the Clerk who gave evidence stated that normally the transport vehicle endorsement shall be made only by the original licensing authority that FAO No.2783 of 1999 - 2 - has issued the licence and it cannot be done by any other authority. It was also brought in evidence that if some other authority were to make the endorsement, a 'No Objection Certificate' must have been obtained from the original licensing authority. The witness could not have evidently spoken about whether a NOC was obtained from them or not. If the endorsement itself is not challenged as fake then I would only assume that the endorsement was done in the manner which is recognized to be done and would raise a presumption as available under Section 114 of the Evidence Act. 2. The Insurance Company shall therefore become liable to the claimant as well as to indemnify the insured. The appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 20.07.2010 sanjeev