FAO No.1775 of 1996 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1775 of 1996 Date of Decision. 16.09.2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Rohtak, Opposite Aakashwani Rohtak through its Branch Manager ......Appellant Versus Smt. Laxmi Devi wd/o Sh. Sri Ram Pandey and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, 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. This is a case where the insurance company contends that the driver was not duly licenced by the fact that he had a driving licence to drive a jeep and a car and did not have a driving licence to drive a matador van. There is no specific category called a matador van and if it does not fall within a category of either the jeep or car or any of the categories mentioned under Section 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act, then it shall be the duty of the insurer to establish that there was some other category pertaining to the particular vehicle, which he did not have. The insurance company has not been able to discharge the burden of proof that there was any breach in terms of the policy with reference to the alleged FAO No.1775 of 1996 -2- validity of the driving licence. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in casting the liability on the insurer and there is no scope for interference. 2. The appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE September 16, 2010 Pankaj*