JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. The appellant-insurer, by the medium of this appeal, has laid challenge to the award, dated 1st October, 2009, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hamirpur, H.P., (for short, the Tribunal), in Claim Petition No.67 of 2007, titled Pawan Kumar vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.52,131/-, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment/deposit, came to be awarded in favour of the claimant and the insurer was saddled with the liability, (for short, the impugned award). 2. The claimant, the owner/insured and the driver have not questioned the impugned award on any count, thus, the same has attained finality so far as it relates to them. 3. Feeling aggrieved, the insurer has challenged the impugned award on the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly fastened the insurer with the liability since the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid and effective driving licence, at the time of accident. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 5. The insurer, in order to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid and effective driving licence to drive the offending vehicle or that the offending vehicle was being plied in contravention to the terms and conditions contained in the insurance policy, has not led any evidence. Instead, owner of the offending vehicle namely respondent No.2 Virender Kumar Chandel appeared in the witness box as RW-1 and deposed that before engaging the driver, he checked the driving licence of driver and only when he was satisfied that the driver namely Brij Lal (original respondent No.3) was competent to drive the vehicle in question, had engaged him as driver. The Tribunal has rightly made the discussion in the impugned award and decided issues No.1A and 3. 6. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant/insurer was asked to show from the record whether the insurer has led any evidence to prove that the driver, at the time of accident, was not having a valid and effective driving licence and whether there is any positive evidence on the file to hold that the owner had committed any breach. The learned counsel for the appellant/insurer was not in a position either to show that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving licence or the owner had committed willful breach. 7. Having said so, it is held that there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. Consequently, the impugned award is upheld. The Registry is directed to release the amount, alongwith interest, in favour of the claimant through his bank account, after proper identification.