IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2329 of 1996 Date of decision:09.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Rameshwari Devi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the Insurance Company. 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 is in appeal challenging the liability on the ground that on the relevant date of the accident, the driver did not have a valid driving licence. It was brought out in evidence through R-1 that the licence, which had been issued originally in the year 1981, was valid upto 25.07.1993. It was renewed only on 17.10.1995 and valid upto 17.10.1998. The accident had taken place on 14.03.1994 admittedly at a time when there was no licence for the driver. The Tribunal relied on some decisions that held that even if the licence had expired so long as there was a renewal and he was not found to be disqualified from holding a driving licence, it could not be stated that the driver was not FAO No.2329 of 1996 - 2 - duly licensed. This aspect has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to hold that a renewal if it is not effected within 30 days from the date of its expiry in terms of Section 15 then Insurance Company cannot be held liable. The law stated find its expression through 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. 2. In view of the law stated, the decision of the Tribunal would require to be modified to provide for the entitlement of the insurer to satisfy the award and recover the same against the insured/owner. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 09.09.2010 sanjeev