F.A.O.NO. 3523 OF 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 3523 OF 2002 Date of decision:22nd September, 2010 United India Insurance Company Ltd. through Assistant Manager, Regional Office, Chandigarh. .......Appellant Versus Ram Dia and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. S.P.Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 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 denying the liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence at the time of accident. The vehicle involved in the accident was a transport vehicle meant for carriage of goods. He had driving licence to drive a scooter, car and jeep which was originally issued on 26.05.1998. The licence was valid upto 26.05.2003. It appears from the evidence of the Licencing Clerk that he had applied for Light Transport Vehicle licence only subsequent to the accident on F.A.O.NO. 3523 OF 2002 2 26.02.2000 and obtained licence that was valid upto 26.02.2003. The evidence therefore, clearly bears out that at the relevant time the driver did not have a licence to drive transport vehicle. 2. The award of the Tribunal is therefore, modified to provide for a liability for the insurer only to satisfy the claimants and secure a right of recovery against the insured, on the ground that the insured was guilty of breach of terms of the policy. 3. The appeal is allowed on the above terms. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 22nd September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik