FAO No.4062 of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4062 of 2005 Date of Decision. 23.09.2010 National Insurance Company Ltd., Regional Office, SCO No.337-340, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh through Administrative Officer ......Appellant Versus Rekha Rani wd/o Chhattarpal and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Vivek Singal, 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 appeal survives for consideration only for considering whether the insurer shall have a right of recovery against the driver and owner. Even at the stage of admission, this Court dismissed the appeal qua the claimants and it is learnt that the insurer had challenged the summary dismissal against the claimants by SLP and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also affirmed the order of dismissal against the claimants. The contention of the insurer is that admittedly the vehicle was goods carriage and the licence that had been produced showed that he had merely a licence to driver a scooter and car and the licence contained no endorsement to drive a FAO No.4062 of 2005 -2- transport vehicle in the manner required under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal reasoned that the vehicle was not shown to be a category above a light motor vehicle by its reference to weight as in excess of 7500 kgs. Even if it is a light motor vehicle and if it was used as a transport vehicle, the requirement of an endorsement under Section 3 is mandatory and the driver will be taken as not duly licenced if the licence did not carry such endorsement. The case law on the subject has been dealt with in detail by this Court in Sushil Vs. Smt. Sunder Devi in FAO No.745 of 2010 dated 16.08.2010. The owner was guilty of breach of terms of the policy and the insurer ought to have been provided the right of recovery. 2. The award of the Tribunal is, under the circumstances, modified to make the insurer liable only to satisfy the claimants and obtain a right of recovery against the insured. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 23, 2010 Pankaj*