Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82481 Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 4054 of 2012 Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. And Another Respondent :- Rekha Devi And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Arun Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- A.P. Kushwaha,Anju Pandey,Pushkar Kushwaha Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Anju Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The appellant by means of present appeal has assailed the judgment and award dated 31.07.2012 passed by Tribunal. 3. Challenging the award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has erred in law in holding that the offending vehicle namely Truck was being driven by a person holding a valid driving licence. It is contended that the driving license of the driver and Truck was fake, therefore, the Tribunal has erred in law in fastening the liability upon the insurance company to pay compensation whereas the Tribunal should have granted right of recovery to the appellant in view of the fact that the owner has committed breach of insurance policy since the offending vehicle was being driven by a person not holding a valid driving licence. 4. Per-contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding on the issue of driving license that the insurance company did not produce any evidence to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence. 5. It is contended that the burden was upon the insurance company to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid license and further the insurance company was to prove that breach on the part of owner was deliberate. Accordingly, it is contended that there is no illegality in the impugned award. 6. Be that as it may, the Tribunal while deciding the issue no.6 has recorded a categorical finding that the insurance company has not filed any document on record to establish that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving license at the time of accident. The finding returned by the Tribunal on the issue of driving license is a finding of fact based upon the evidence on record and same does not call for any interference by this Court. 7. Consequently, appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Order on Civil Misc. Application No.341361 of 2012 From the perusal of the affidavit filed in support of additional evidence application, this Court is of the view that none of the ingredients of order 41 Rule 27 of CPC has been made out by the appellant so as to invite the Court to invoke its power under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC. Order on Cross Objection Ms. Anju Pandey, learned counsel for claimant/respondent submits that claimants do not want to press the cross objection, therefore, the same may be dismissed as not pressed. In view of the above, cross objection is dismissed as not pressed. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Mohit Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad