IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4948 of 2007 Date of decision:23.07.2010 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Leela Wanti and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Ms. Sonal Datta, Advocate, for Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, 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 challenges the award passed without minding the fact that the driver did not have a valid driving licence on the date of the accident which was on 09.04.2004. Admittedly, the licence which was produced bore out that it had expired on 04.04.2001 and renewal had been made subsequently beyond a period of 30 days. The issue arising out of a situation vis-a-vis the insurer's right to claim refund from the insured was dealt with in National Insurance Company Limited Versus Jarnail Singh-2007(15) SCC 28 and New India Insurance Company Limited Versus Suresh Chander Aggarwal-2009(15) SCC 761. FAO No.4948 of 2007 - 2 - 2. The Tribunal has however reasoned, referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swaran Singh's case in 2004 ACJ 1 that if the owner was satisfied himself that he had a licence at the relevant time, the Insurance Company was still be liable. The reliance on this judgment to the facts of the case was wholly misplaced. In a case where an owner satisfies himself about the fact of possession of the licence and assumed it to be valid and it later turns out that it is fake, then the bona fides of the owner is definitely relevant. In a case where the licence itself had expired, there is no question of a bona fide belief that it did not expire. Then the fact which has to be seen if the owner had not taken care to see whether there was a valid period of licence, in which case he must take the consequences of his own lapse. Under such circumstances, there is no question of the insured obtaining indemnity from the insurer. 3. The liability of the Insurance Company shall be only to satisfy the claim of claimants and it will be entitled to recover the same from the insured. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23.07.2010 sanjeev