FAO No.3291 of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3291 of 2004 Date of Decision. 24.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office, SCO No.332- 334, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh through its duly authority attorney A.M. ......Appellant Versus Jaspreet Singh son of Sh. Makhan Singh and another .....Respondents Present: Mr.Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Pradeep Bedi, 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 driver had a licence to drive a scooter and tractor but the vehicle he was driving, was a light motor vehicle. Tractor is also a light motor vehicle. It ought to be specifically elicited that the driving skills involved are different and with the licence he had for driving a tractor, he could not drive a car. It ought to be a mater of fact established at the trial. Section 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act itself does not provide for any specific category of the nature of vehicle under the light motor vehicle category. Even the form of application prescribed under Form 4 of the Central Motor Vehicles FAO No.3291 of 2004 -2- Rules does not make any categorization amongst the light motor vehicle themselves. It cannot, therefore, be contended that the insured's driver did not have a valid driving licence. 2. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 24, 2010 Pankaj*