JUDGMENT Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J.: - The present appeal has been filed by the appellant- Insurance Company, challenging the impugned Award dated 01.03.1994, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur. 2. The sole argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the original driving licence was not produced on record. He refers to the testimony of RW-1, Satnam Singh, Clerk in the office of the District Transport Officer, Hoshiarpur, and states that the renewal licence was not issued in the name of Onkar Singh or that it was renewed at the serial number appearing on the original exhibit, driving licence held by the driver at the relevant time. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3, has argued that the original driving licence was taken into possession by the police in the criminal case and that Ex.R3, is its photo copy. It is further contended that the driver had shown the original licence to the owner, Krishan Kumar, in the year 1991. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The testimony of RW-1, Satnam Singh, Clerk from the licensing authority, goes to show that the renewal licence was neither issued to Onkar Singh, nor the serial number appearing on Ex.R3, matched with the record. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the licence held by the driver at the time of the accident was not a valid licence, therefore, learned Tribunal ought to have granted recovery rights to the appellant-Insurance Company. 6. In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent that the appellant-Insurance Company shall have the recovery rights over the owner and driver. ---------0.B.S.0------------