IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.5589 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:06.01.2011 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Ram Khilari ..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Ms. Sonal Datta, Advocate, for Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Arun Yadav, Advocate, for the respondent. ---- 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 challenging the liability cast on it on the ground that the driver, who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time, was not having a valid driving licence. The vehicle was a goods carrying transport vehicle and the driver had only licence to drive a motorcycle, scooter, jeep and car. A transport vehicle required a specific endorsement under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act and if the licence did not carry such endorsement, it cannot be stated that he was duly licensed. It has been held in the decision in New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Prabhu Lal-2008 ACJ 727 (SC) that a light motor vehicle licence would be insufficient to satisfy the FAO No.5589 of 2009 (O&M) - 2 - requirement of law when it also required a transport vehicle endorsement. The Insurance Company could have been, therefore, made liable and the award passed by the Tribunal is, therefore, erroneous. 2. The award against the insurer is set aside and the appeal by the insurer is allowed. The liability however shall be to satisfy the claim and make recovery from the insured/owner of the offending vehicle. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 06.01.2011 sanjeev