JUDGMENT Dev Darshan Sud, J.-This appeal arises out of the judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Una, awarding compensation to the appellants-claimants, who are the parents, on the death of their son in an accident which took place on December 25, 2002. 2. The point urged for determination by the Insurance Company is that it could not be held liable as the driver was not possessed of a valid driving licence. While dealing with this contention, the learned Tribunal held that Ex.RY, which is a photocopy of the original driving licence of respondent No.1, is a valid licence on the date when the accident occurred on 25.12.2002. Learned counsel has taken me through the evidence on record and I find it difficult to accept the findings of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. I find from the evidence that RW-1 Banta singh has appeared as a witness and states that he was in possession of a valid driving licence. In cross-examination he admits that the licence was issued to him in the year 1975 for three years and it was not renewed by him thereafter. A new driving licence was obtained by him on 10.2.2003 valid up to 9.2.2006, although he denies the suggestion that he has no valid driving licence in this period. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal relied upon the statement of RW2, Raghubir Singh , Additional Criminal Ahlmad in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.1, Amb, District Una, who was summoned with the record of Criminal Case No.21-11/2003, titled: State vs. Banta Singh, under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. He states in his cross-examination that:- “It is correct that Ex.R1 is having the old Driving Licence No.RJL.1480/75, dated 9.12.1975. It is also correct that the licence in the summoned file has been renewed from time to time and lastly it was renewed from 6.3.1993 to 7.2.1998.” 3. The cross-examination of RW-1 on this aspect also be considered:- “I had obtained the driving licence from DTO Shri Ganganagar. It is correct that this licence was got issued by me in 1975. Initially it was valid for three years only. It is correct that I had not got this licence renewed at Shri Ganganagar thereafter. It is correct that I obtained the driving licence again on 10.2.2003 valid upto 9.6.2006. It is correct that this licence was got issued by me in 1975. Initially it was valid for three years only. It is correct that I had not got this licence renewed at Shri Ganganagar thereafter. It is correct that I obtained the driving licence again on 10.2.2003 valid upto 9.6.2006. It is incorrect that the licence was issued to me on 10.2.2003 after retest. I do not have the previous driving originally issued to me as the same was taken by the police in the Criminal Case of this FIR. It is correct that the photocopy Ex.RY is the copy of my original driving licence which was taken into possession by the police. It is incorrect that in the month of December, 2002 the validity of my licence had already expired. It is correct that I was not holding valid and effective driving licence at the time of alleged accident. The Criminal Case is pending at Amb and the next date of hearing is fixed for 9.6.2005”. 4. When read as a whole, it cannot by any stretch of imagination, be held that there was a valid driving licence with the respondent No.3 Banta Singh on the date of the accident i.e. 25th December, 2002. This appeal is, therefore, allowed. I hold that the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to satisfy the compensation amount awarded. 5. Keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co.Ltd. vs. Swaran Singh and Others, 2004(3) SCC 297, a direction is issued that the Insurance Company will be at liberty to recover this amount from the owner and the driver jointly or severally. The amount awarded to the claimants, if paid, shall not be recovered from them. This appeal is, accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.