FAO No.2196 of 1995 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2196 of 1995 Date of Decision. 16.09.2010 National Insurance Company Ltd., Jaito through Shri R.C. Gupta, Admn. Officer, Regional Office-II, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Nasib Kaur widow of Shri Darshan Singh son of Shri Sher Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Pradeep Bedi, 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 appeal is by the insurance company challenging liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The local commissioner had been appointed to verify the details of the licence said to have been issued from the DTO at Hyderabad. The statement had been recorded and a report had been given into Court stating that the licence was fake. The Tribunal, however, did not rely on the same having regard to the fact that there had been subsequent renewals at Faridkot and finding the renewal to be true, relied on the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sucha Singh and others (1994) 1 The FAO No.2196 of 1995 -2- Punjab Law Reporter 140 and held that the driver's licence must be taken as genuine having regard to the renewal of the licence. The law has been settled through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Divinder Singh (2007) 8 SCC 698 that even if the renewal is genuine but the original is fake, the licence must only be taken to be fake. No evidence was given by the owner to explain the circumstances and beliefs which he had about the validity or otherwise of the licence. 2. It should, therefore, be under the circumstances taken that the owner was guilty of violation of the terms of policy and the owner shall, therefore, not have an indemnity from the insurer. The liability shall be only to satisfy the claim of the claimants and it will have a right to recover the same against the insured and not against the claimants. 3. The award of the Tribunal is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 16, 2010 Pankaj*