FAO No.77 of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.77 of 1998 Date of Decision. 30.09.2010 National Insurance Company Ltd., SCO No.337-340, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh through its Regional Manager ......Appellant Versus Krishan Devi widow of Amarjit s/o Jewan Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. L.M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. 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 insurance company is on appeal challenging the liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The insurance company had filed a petition for production of driving licence and the Court had also passed an order. The counsel, who was appearing did not comply with the direction and ultimately reported no instruction that led to the Court setting him ex parte. An application was again taken by the insurer to direct the driver to produce the driving licence and initially the Tribunal is reported to have dismissed their application and by an intervention through an order of this Court, the insurer was granted an opportunity to again re-summon the driver. The summons have been FAO No.77 of 1998 -2- taken for production of the driver and he was served dasti also. He did not still appear. The entitlement of the insurer to secure production of licence is recognized statutorily under Section 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act. If the insurer makes the demand and the driver or the owner would not produce the document and make themselves absent after originally appearing through counsel, It should only be taken that the driver did not have a valid driving licence and an adverse inference has to be drawn for non- production. I hold, therefore, that the driver did not have a valid driving licence and the insured had committed a breach of terms of policy. 2. The award of the Tribunal would, therefore, require to be modified to provide for a liability of the insurer only to satisfy the claim of the claimants and recover the same against the insured. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 30, 2010 Pankaj*