IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3654 of 2007(O&M) Date of Decision 18.08.2009 Jagbir @ Nambardar and another ......Appellants VERSUS National Insurance Company Limited and another ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Jai Singh Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate, for for respondent No.1. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): This appeal, preferred by the appellants-owner and driver (herein referred as 'the appellants') is directed against the award dated 01.05.2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.1,77,547/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum to respondent No.2-claimant (herein referred as 'respondent No.2') and against appellants and respondent No.1-insurance company. However, it was ordered that respondent No.1 would pay the compensation but could recover the same from the appellants. It was urged on behalf of the appellants that the driving licence of appellant Jagbir @ Nambardar was found to be valid by Farukh Khan Surveyor and Loss Assessor appointed by respondent No.1-insurance company. Since the insurance company is not challenging the validity of the driving licence, therefore,the request made by the appellants is acceded and the driving licence as well as the verification report are taken on record FAO No.3654 of 2007(O&M) -2- as Ex.A1 & A2 by way of additional evidence. To the contrary, respondent No.2 has lead no evidence in rebuttal. Thus, on the basis of the evidence, so led, while deciding issue No.3, it would be observed that appellant Jagbir @ Nambardar was holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident. Consequently, the policy cannot be termed as in contravention of the terms and conditions of the licence. Resultantly, findings returned by the Tribunal on issue No.3 are reversed and it is decided in favour of the appellants. In the wake of the aforesaid discussions, the appeal is accepted. Now, only respondent No.1-Insurance Company would be liable to make payment of compensation to respondent No.2-claimant, as assessed by the Tribunal. No order as to costs. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 18.08.2009 mamta-II