JUDGMENT Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. This appeal has been preferred by Uttarakhand Transport Corporation challenging the judgment rendered by the Tribunal on 9.6.2009 in MACT Petition No. 376/2007. Accident occurred on 9.10.2007 at 11.30 AM when bicycle borne Yogendra Singh, aged about 48 years, was dashed by the bus no. UA07-M-6216 on Kashipur-Rudrapur highway near Gadarpur. As a consequence, Yogendra Singh died on 12.10.2007 after having been referred from one hospital to another. 2. Bus was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company and was being driven by its driver Vijay Pal Singh, who though was a servant of the appellant Corporation and holding his licence w.e.f. 10.1.2001 to 9.1.2004 issued from the transport office at Rudrapur. This licence was further renewed after the accident w.e.f. 17.10.2007 to 16.10.2010 by the competent office of the transport authority. 3. Learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,24,000/- along with 7 per cent annual interest thereon from the date of institution of the petition dated 26.10.2007 till the date of actual payment. Liability was primarily fastened upon the insurance company, but the right to recover the awarded amount was conferred on the insurer against the appellant Uttarakhand Transport Corporation on the premise that on the date of the accident, the driver was not having valid driving licence. 4. I have heard learned Counsel of the Transport Corporation, insurance company and the driver. 5. It has been argued by the appellant’s Counsel that licence of the driver Vijay Pal Singh was soon renewed within a week from the date of accident after retesting his skill and competency to drive the bus of the Corporation. So, on this basis, he had not been incapacitated to drive the vehicle on the relevant date and time on 9.10.2007. 6. This argument seems to be sound, but even though I feel that it does not complete the parameters of the validity of the licence as have been held in the National Insurance Company v. Swaran Singh & Others, (2004) 3 SCC 297 , where the liability was fastened on the insurer, all the same the validity of the driving licence had expired. The relevancy of Swaran Singh case has been discussed by the Hon’ble Apex Court itself in Ram Babu Tiwari v. United India Insurance Co. The relevancy of Swaran Singh case has been discussed by the Hon’ble Apex Court itself in Ram Babu Tiwari v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others, 2008 (3) T.A.C. 769, wherein it was held that if the renewal of the validity of the licence had been done or applied therefor within 30 days from the date of expiry, then the licence cannot be held to be invalid. 7. So, even if some leverage is extended to the driver or the employer for getting the licence renewed, then this leverage can be for some reasonable delay, i.e. may be of few months. But in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, where the licence was got renewed after three years and nine months after the date of accident, then I doubt the applicability of the ratio/principle laid down in Swaran Singh case and I feel that the precedent as rendered in Ram Babu Tiwari case is predominantly applicable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 8. So, in view of what have been set forth above, I feel that right to recover the compensation amount has correctly been conferred to the insurance company against the appellant. I find no force in this appeal. It is hereby dismissed. 9. Registry shall remit the amount of compulsory statutory deposit along with the interest it has earned to the Tribunal concerned. Appellant shall deposit the remaining amount within a month. 10. Let the LCR be sent back.