JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the award dated 24th December, 2010, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II), Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) in M.A.C. Petition No. 51-S/2 of 2007, titled as Shri Mohinder Singh versus The Oriental Insurance Company & others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lac only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, was granted in favour of the claimant and the insurer came to be saddled with liability (for short, “the impugned award”). 2. The claimant, insured-owner and driver have not questioned the impugned award, on any count. Thus, it has attained finality, so far it relates to them. 3. The insurer has questioned the impugned award on the following three grounds: (i) that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident; (ii) that the owner had not obtained Special Route Permit at the relevant time; (iii) that the insured-owner has committed willful breach. 4. These grounds are relating partly to Issues No. 6 & 7. It is apt to reproduce Issues No. 6 & 7 framed by the Tribunal herein:- “6. Whether the driver of the vehicle was not having valid and effective driving licence? …OPR-1 7. Whether the respondent No.2 was not having valid RC and fitness certificate in respect of the vehicle in question? …OPR-1” 5. It was for the insurer to plead and prove that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and the owner-insured has committed willful breach, has failed to do so, thus has failed to discharge the onus. Accordingly, it is held that the Tribunal has rightly decided Issues No. 6 & 7. 6. The adequacy of compensation is not in dispute. However, I have perused the record and the impugned award and am of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly made the assessment. The amount awarded is adequate. Accordingly, it is held that the just and appropriate compensation has been granted by the Tribunal. 7. Having said so, no interference is required, thus, the impugned award is upheld. 8. Registry is directed to release the awarded amount in favour of the claimant, strictly as per the terms and conditions contained in the impugned award. Accordingly, it is held that the just and appropriate compensation has been granted by the Tribunal. 7. Having said so, no interference is required, thus, the impugned award is upheld. 8. Registry is directed to release the awarded amount in favour of the claimant, strictly as per the terms and conditions contained in the impugned award. 9. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. 10. Send down the record after placing a copy of the judgment on the Tribunal's file.