IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7 of 2000 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.09.2010 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Kulwant Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate, for Mr.Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 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. In this case the contention of the insurer is that the driver was having a licence to drive a heavy goods vehicle but he was driving a heavy passenger vehicle. In my view, this cannot make a difference to say that the driver was not duly licensed. It would again require to be proved that the driving skills were different and a driver of a heavy goods vehicle could not have driven a heavy passenger vehicle. The form of licence under Section 10 of the MV Act itself does not make a categorization in the manner pleaded for by the insurer. The Insurance Company shall, therefore, be liable and the Tribunal ha correctly found so. 2. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 17.09.2010 sanjeev