IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1508 of 2001 Date of decision:10.08.2010 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Apurva Kalia and others ...Respondents II. FAO No.1509 of 2001 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Alok Chawla and others ...Respondents III. FAO No.1510 of 2001 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Dr. P.L. Chawla and others ...Respondents IV. FAO No.1511 of 2001 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Santosh Modi/Gupta and others ...Respondents V. FAO No.1512 of 2001 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Sheeru alias Taranjit Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- FAO No.1508 of 2001 - 2 - Present: Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.A.K. Khunger, Advocate, 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. All the appeals address the same contention viz., the liability of an insurer when the driver had but a fake driving licence. The Insurance Company proved before the Tribunal by examining a Clerk form the Licensing Authority, Chamba that the particular driving licence number found in the licence of the driver, had not been in fact issued in the name of the driver. The Ahalmad from the Criminal Court had also been examined to produce the copy of the driving licence in respect of which, evidence was given. The Tribunal held that the licence of the driver was fake but found that it will not absolve the Insurance Company from its liability. It is correct in so far as the liability of the insurer against the claimants are concerned. However, the Insurance Company shall have a right to recover the same after satisfying the award from the owner in line of authority of Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited Versus. Swaran Singh (2004) 3 SCC 279 and United India Insurance Versus Divinder Singh (2007) 8 SCC 342. 2. The Insurance Company has also urged that there had been no negligence on the part of the driver. This contention I am afraid the Insurance Company shall not be entitled to urge. Furthers, this was a case resulting in death or injury where there was sufficient evidence on FAO No.1508 of 2001 - 3 - record to find that the driver of the insured was responsible for the accident. The aspect of negligence is seen by the very fact that it resulted in several casualty by no intervening factor than the driving of the insured's vehicle. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Khaushama Begum Versus New India Assurance Company Limited-(2001) 1 SCC 155, held that the standard of evidence in a Motor Vehicles Tribunal is not as extracting as it is in a criminal case. The finding of negligence is confirmed. 3. The awards of the Tribunal are modified only to the extent of restricting the liability of the insurer to make the payments to the claimants and recover the same against the owner/insured. 4. The appeals are allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 10.08.2010 sanjeev