FAO No.1680 of 1998 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1680 of 1998 Date of Decision. 14.10.2010 M/s New India Assurance Company Ltd., SCO No.36-37A Chandigarh through Sh. K.B. Bindal, Asstt. Manager duly constituted attorney/authorized person ......Appellant Versus Resham Kumar and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. R.K. Bashamboo, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Manisha, Advocate for Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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. The insurance company denies liability on the ground that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The licence was said to have been issued from the Licensing Authority at Guwahati and the driver had also produced another driving licence said to have been issued from the Licensing Authority Bathinda. The evidence was brought with reference to the licence said to have been issued at Guwahati to be fake and before the Tribunal, an attempt was made to prove the driving licence said to have been issued from Bathinda is also not genuine. While Section 6 of the Motor Vehicles Act states that no person can obtain driving license for more than one place, If a particular licence produced is found to be false, it FAO No.1680 of 1998 -2 may not lead to a similar conclusion that yet another licence should also be false. Specific evidence has not been led to show that the licence was not genuine and the Tribunal was, therefore, justified in its conclusion that the insurer had not established its burden of proof effectively. 2. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 14, 2010 Pankaj*