FAO No.2110 of 2000 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2110 of 2000 Date of Decision. 21.07.2010 I United India Ins. Co. Ltd., Regional Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh through its duly constituted attorney .........Appellant Versus Anguri Devi wd/o Krishan Lal s/o Madho Ram and others .......Respondents Present: Mr. Gopal Mittal, 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 issue in this case is with reference to the validity of the licence for a driver to drive a transport vehicle. The policy of insurance was for a commercial vehicle, which is discribed to be for a public carrier (goods carrying vehicle). The Tribunal reasoned that although the licence produced by the driver was for a light motor vehicle, there is no specific classification under Section 10-H for driving a medium transport vehicle. The Tribunal failed to see that a transport vehicle is a distinct classification and there is also a further requirement under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act for a driver to obtain a special endorsement. In its absence, the driver cannot be said to have a valid driving licence. The Tribunal ought to FAO No.2110 of 2000 -2- have, therefore, provided for a right of recovery of the amount to the insurer against the insured. 2. Under such circumstances, the Insurance Company shall not be liable to indemnify the insured. The liability is to satisfy the claim under the award with a right of recovery against the insured. The award of the Tribunal is modified and the appeal allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE July 21, 2010 Pankaj*