F.A.O.NOs. 1945 to 1947 OF 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. F.A.O.NO. 1945 OF 2002 Date of decision:12th October, 2010 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Office, Chandigarh and another. .......Appellants Versus Smt. Rajpati and others ........Respondents 2. F.A.O.NO. 1946 OF 2002 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Office, Chandigarh and another. .......Appellants Versus Ram Chander and others ........Respondents 3. F.A.O.NO. 1947 OF 2002 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Office, Chandigarh and another. .......Appellants Versus Piyare Lal and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Gautam Bhardwaj, Advocate, for Mr. N.K.Khosla, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 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 F.A.O.NOs. 1945 to 1947 OF 2002 2 K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. All the appeals are at the instance of the Insurance Company. It is contended that the driver of the truck did not have a valid driving licence. In the course of trial, it appears that the Tribunal had sought for a report from the DTO, Jind to give details of licence No. 5238/MTR/97. The report is on file that 5238/MTR/97 had not been issued in the year 1997 and only serial no. 1 to 4143, had been issued in the year 1997. It is stated in the report that 5238/MTR/97 was issued in the name of Sandeep Kumar. The driver who was driving the offending vehicle was named Mohan Singh. The attempt of the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company was therefore that the driving licence was fake. 2. I cannot accept a letter from the authority as constituting any evidence. The Insurance Company must have taken that as the basis for bringing an appropriate evidence by summoning the register and securing the presence of a witness to vouch for what original register contained. I find, there is insufficiency of evidence to support the claim that the driving licence was fake. However, the Tribunal by issuing a letter to secure a report had led the insurer to believe that report from the DTO was sufficient to dispense with the requirement of examination of any witness. 3. I am of the view that the Insurance Company shall have one opportunity to establish its contention that the driver did not have a valid driving licence, for that will have a bearing for obtaining F.A.O.NOs. 1945 to 1947 OF 2002 3 recovery rights against the insured/owner. The award of the Tribunal in so far as have finding regarding driving licence is set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal, Jind for afresh disposal in accordance with law, on the issue of driving licence alone. The award passed by the Tribunal as regards the quantum and making the insurer liable shall stand confirmed. The remand is only for settling an inter se dispute between the insurer and the insured and driver. It shall not be necessary for the claimants to even participate in the proceedings. The insurer and the driver shall be also at liberty to adduce their own evidence in support of their contentions. 4. All the appeals are remanded back and disposed of as above. 5. Parties are directed to appear before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind on 23.11.2010. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 12th October, 2010 Shivani Kaushik