FAO No.2003 of 2002 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2003 of 2002 Date of Decision. 19.07.2010 Oriental Insurance Company Limited, having its Regional Office at Sector 17, Chandigarh through its Asstt. Manager .........Appellant Versus Rahish (minor) son of Sardar Khan and others .......Respondents Present: Mr. Sanjeev Pabbi, 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 vehicle involved in the accident was a mini bus, which was insured for commercial purpose. Evidently, it was used as a service vehicle which under the terms of the Motor Vehicles Act was a 'transport vehicle' within the definition of Section 2(47). A driver cannot be said to be holding a valid licence if his driving licence did not contain a transport vehicle endorsement as required under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Admittedly, the driver had only a licence to drive a light motor vehicle and it contained no public transport endorsement. Even the terms of policy would show that the vehicle has been insured only as a commercial vehicle. The Tribunal, under the circumstances, ought to have seen that there had been a breach of the terms of policy and provided for a right of FAO No.2003 of 2002 -2- recovery against the insured. 2. The appeal is allowed to provide for liability to make the payment to the claimants with the right of recovery against the insured. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE July 19, 2010 Pankaj*