FAO No.4744 of 2008(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.3744 of 2008(O&M) Decided on : August 05, 2009 S.N.Bhalla ... Appellant VERSUS Gurmej Singh and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sherry K.Singla, Advocate for the appellant. A.N.JINDAL, J.- In this appeal against the award dated 7.8.2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bathinda, the grievance of the owner – appellant (herein referred as `the appellant') of the offending vehicle is that though the driving licence of Baljit Singh, driver of Trailer bearing Reg.No.PB-03P/9226, was ultimately found to be fake, yet he had satisfied himself regarding the fact that the driver was holding a valid driving licence, therefore, he could not be held liable and it was only the Insurance Company, who is liable to bear the burden of compensation. In this regard, he has referred to the decision of the Apex Court in case Lal Chand vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 2006(3) TAC 321(SC), wherein, their Lordships observed as under:- FAO No.4744 of 2008(O&M) [ 2 ] “8. We have perused the pleadings and the orders passed by the Tribunal and also of the High Court and the annexures filed alongwith the appeal. This Court in the case of United India Insurance Co.Ltd. vs. Lehru & Ors, reported in 2003(3) SCC 338: 2003 (2) TAC 1, in paragraph 20 has observed that where the owner has satisfied himself that the driver has a licence and is driving competently, there would be no breach of Section 149(2(a)(ii). He will, therefore, have to check whether the driver has a driving licence and if, the driver produces a driving licence, which on the face of it looks genuine, the owner is not expected to find out whether the licence has in fact been issued by a competent authority or not. The owner would then take test of the driver, and if he finds that the driver is competent to drive the vehicle, he will hire the driver. In both the judgments i.e. Lal Chand's case (supra) and Lehru's case (supra), it is observed that the owner in order to make sure about the validity of the driving licence has to examine the driving licence produced by the driver and if it appears to be genuine at the face of it, then he would take his test regarding competency of his driving and on finding him competent to driver the vehicle, would employ him as such. If the owner satisfies the aforesaid conditions, then there would be no breach of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Insurance Company would in that case, not be absolved of its liability.” FAO No.4744 of 2008(O&M) [ 3 ] Now, coming to the instant case, it is nowhere stated by the owner – appellant that he took a driving test of the driver and found him competent to drive the vehicle and that he never knew that his licence was fake. In the circumstances, once the Insurance Company has proved that the driving licence was fake, having not been issued by any Licensing Authority, then the onus is shifted upon the owner to prove his bonafides. Thus, no grounds are made out to interfere with the findings returned by the Tribunal. Appeal dismissed. August 05, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE