FAO No.338 of 1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.338 of 1994 DATE OF DECISION: January 12, 2011 KAPIL KUMAR SOOD ...APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement. No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No ---- PRESENT: MR. HITESH PANDIT, ADVOCATE AND MR. RAJESH GARG, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT. MR. KUNAL GARG, AAG, HARYANA. MR. INDERJIT SHARMA, ADVOCATE AND MR. PARDEEP BEDI, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT-INSURANCE COMPANY. NONE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) The only point urged in this appeal is the extent of liability for the insurance company. The vehicle was said to have been insured as a taxi originally, but later on converted for personal use. The copy of the policy was filed as Ex.P7 and change of vehicle endorsement was made after making an additional premium for Rs.345/- on 8.5.1991. The terms of the policy states that the liability of the company under Section II(i) & (ii) shall be `6000/-. The case emanates from a claim for damages for a vehicle and therefore, as per the terms of the policy, the liability of the insurer shall be restricted with only to `6000/-. The amount in excess shall be against the FAO No.338 of 1994 -2- insured and cannot be enforced against the insurer. The Tribunal records the same finding as reasoned out above and I have seen no scope for interference. The appeal is dismissed. January 12, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE