F.A.O.NO. 224 OF 1998 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 224 OF 1998 Date of decision:27th September, 2010 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office, SCO 109- 110-111, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh through Shri S.M.Garg its Manager. .......Appellant Versus Bharat Bhushan and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Jagtar Kureel, Advocate, for the appellant. None for respondent Nos. 1,3,4 and 5. Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. 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 liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The Insurance Company did not no more than producing a report that the licence was not valid but adduced no proof to prove the same. It can not be stated that the insurer had discharged the burden of proof in the manner required by law. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would also challenge the F.A.O.NO. 224 OF 1998 2 quantum which is not a permissible defence under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and an appeal on quantum without permission under Section 170 of the Act is not permissible in the light of law laid down in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi and others(2002) ACJ 1950. 3. The appeal is dismissed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 27th September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik