F.A.O.NO. 2867 OF 2002 and Cross Objection No. 90-CII of 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 2867 OF 2002 and Cross Objection No. 90-CII of 2002 Date of decision:1st October, 2010 National Insurance Company Limited SCO No. 332-334, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through Assistant Manager, Regional Office, Punjab .......Appellant Versus Rajwant Singh and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate, for Mr. Govind Goel, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sham Lall Bhalla, Advocate, for for the cross objectors/claimants. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal, challenging the mere right of recovery granted to the insurer, although it found that the driving licence was not genuine. The owner has filed a cross objection to contend that the finding of the Tribunal that the licence was not genuine was erroneous for it merely acted on the report which was F.A.O.NO. 2867 OF 2002 and Cross Objection No. 90-CII of 2002 2 seen unsubstantiated. It is contended that no person from the licencing authority was examined and no register was produced before the Court to substantiate the plea that the Driving Licence was not genuine. 2. Even in a case where the driving licence is fake, the right of recovery and liability to satisfy the claimant could never be in doubt. The right, if at all, could be only right of recovery against the insured. This law has been too well established to require any further clarification. The liability of the insurer even in the case of driving licence being not proved, was held to arise, in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co., Shimla v. Kamla, (2001) 4 SCC 342 and affirmed subsequently in National Insurance Co v Swaran Singh (2004) 3 SCC 297. 3. A report of the licencing authority which is not statutorily provided does not have the status of a public document. A report by an officer will still have to be proved in the manner known to law by calling as witness any person connected with the document and the relevant original register should also produced before the Court to state whether the particular licence no. containing the details of the entries relating to the name and validity tally with the original or not. That proof was not tendered genuine and the Tribunal was consequently in error in finding that the driving licence was fake. I affirm the finding of the Tribunal and dismiss the appeal filed by the insurer. Cross objection is allowed setting aside the finding that the F.A.O.NO. 2867 OF 2002 and Cross Objection No. 90-CII of 2002 3 insurer had not established that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 1st October, 2010 Shivani Kaushik