FAO No. 633 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 633 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 11.2.2010 ... United India Insurance Co. Limited ................ Appellant vs. Gurnam Kaur and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Rajesh K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) This is an appeal directed by the Insurance Company against the award dated 10.10.2009, passed by Sh. J.S. Klar, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, vide which the United India Insurance Co. Limited – now appellant, has been ordered to satisfy the award and thereafter claim the amount from the owner. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since the Tribunal itself has held that driving licence was not valid, on that account the Insurance Company is not liable. To support his contention, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has FAO No. 633 of 2010 -2- relied upon authorities reported as National Insurance Company Limited vs. Parvathneni and another JT 2009 (12) SC 275 and Prem Kumari and others vs. Prahlad Dev and others 2008 ACJ 776. I have carefully considered the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, but do not find any force in that submission. In Parvathneni 's case (Supra) there was a dispute whether any policy was in existence as cheque was dishonoured. Prem Kumari's case (Supra) relied upon by counsel for the appellant, demolishes the case of the appellant as in that case the Insurance Company was permitted to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle by initiating proceedings before the Executing Court. Both these authorities relates to Division Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, this matter has been finally decided by three Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the authority reported as National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swaran Singh and others 2004 ACJ 1. In the said authority, it has been held that where there is a valid policy, in that case the Insurance Company is liable to satisfy the award in favour of third party at the first instance and then recover the awarded amount from the owner or the driver of the vehicle, even where the Insurance Company could establish breach of terms of policy on the part of the owner of the vehicle. In that authority, it has been held that this position is holding the field for a long time. So, applying the doctrine of stare decisis, the three Judges Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court held that it should not be deviated. So, in these circumstances, the right of the Insurance FAO No. 633 of 2010 -3- Company has already been protected. So, no ground for interference is made out. Consequently the appeal stands dismissed. ( K.C. Puri ) 11.2.2010 Judge chugh