JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The plaintiff's suit, for, rendition of, a, decree, of, monetary damages, arising, from the insured Maruti Car, bearing a temporary registration number, hence, during, the, subsistence, of, an insurance policy, executed inter-se the plaintiff, and, the defendant, rather suffering damages, in, an accident involving, it, stood decreed, hence, by the learned trial Judge, for, a sum of Rs. 2,12,086/- along with interest, (i) and, in an appeal carried therefrom, by the aggrieved defendant, before the learned first appellate Court, the latter Court, rather reversed, the, afore judgment and decree, rendered, vis-a-vis, the plaintiff. The plaintiff becoming aggrieved therefrom, hence, for, begetting reversal, of, the verdict pronounced, upon, upon, Civil Appeal No. 42-S/13 of 2018, on 16.3.2019, has instituted, the, extant Second Appeal before this Court. 2. Though the relevant mishap hence involving the plaintiff's vehicle, wherein, it, suffered damages, rather occurred during, the, subsistence, of, a valid contract of insurance, executed, inter-se, the contesting litigants. However, in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the, happening, of, the ill-fated mishap, the, temporary registration number, as, stood initially assigned, hence by the Motor License Authority concerned, vis-a-vis, the plaintiff's vehicle, was, not in vogue, given, it, expiring, on 20.4.2014, (a) and, he within one month thereafter, omitted to obtain, from, the Regional Licensing Authority concerned, a, permanent registration number, qua, his insured vehicle. On, the, afore factual matrix, though the learned trial Judge, had, concluded that any want, of, the plaintiff's vehicle, not in contemporaneity, with the happening, of, the mishap, hence involving the insured vehicle, hence becoming assigned, a, permanent registration number, hence by the RLA concerned, rather not constituting, any, fundamental breach of the terms, and, conditions of the insurance policy, as, the contract of insurance, executed inter-se both, yet remained, in, subsistence, in contemporaneity, with, the happening, of, the ill-fated mishap, (b) and, with no covenant becoming cast, in, the apt contract of insurance, where through the insured, stood contractually enjoined, to obtain, a, permanent registration number, vis-a-vis, the insured vehicle, after expiry, of, the temporary registration number, obviously, rather enjoining, the, insured to re-compense, the, damages, encumbered, upon, the plaintiff's vehicle, (i) besides, it was held qua the afore contravention, vis-a-vis, the mandate(s) borne in Section 39, and, in Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, making, him hence, amenable, only for, penal action, in, consonance with the apposite therewith provisions, embodied in the Motor Vehicle Act, (ii) and, reiteratedly, the insurer becoming contractually obliged, to, monetarily re-compence the plaintiff, vis-a-vis, the claimed amount. 3. However, for the reason(s) to be assigned hereinafter, the, afore assigned reason, by the, learned trial Judge, in, his hence decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, is, per-se flimsy, and, warrants disapprobation, (i) as, aptly done, by, the learned first appellate Court, (ii) given the mandatory, and, statutory provisions, of, Section 39, and, of Section 43, of, the Motor Vehicle Act, rather, peremptorily enjoining, the, owner of the motor vehicle concerned, to, ply the vehicle, only, upon his/within, the, domains thereof, and, after, expiry, of, a temporary registration number, initially assigned qua his vehicle, to, hence obtain thereafter, a, permanent registration number, qua therewith, from, the RLA concerned. Apparently, the afore mandatory statutory provisions, remained uncomplied, with, by the plaintiff, and, hence when the vehicle, was, unuseable, at the relevant time, by the plaintiff, and, dehors no covenant, becoming, embodied in the insurance policy, executed inter-se the contesting litigants, and, it hence making it incumbent, upon, the insurer, to, after expiry, of, a temporary registration number, initially assigned, vis-a-vis, the Motor Licence Authority concerned, to, thereafter obtain, from, the authority concerned, a, permanent registration number, qua therewith, (iii) rather only for ensuring qua the contract, of, insurance, not breaching any public law, or, any mandatory statutory provisions hence, is, required to be read, into, the apposite contract, of, insurance. Reiteratedly, when hereat, the afore mandatory, and, statutory provisions, become breached, or, uncomplied with, hence obviously disobliged, the, insurer, to, monetary(s) re-compense the plaintiff, for, the, damage, encumbered, upon, his insured vehicle. 4. The above discussion, unfolds, qua the conclusion(s), as arrived by the learned first appellate Court, being based, upon a proper and mature appreciation, of, evidence on record. Accordingly, no substantial questions, of law, much less, a, substantial question of law, arises, for, determination, by this Court. 5. In view of the above discussion, the instant appeal, is, dismissed, and, the judgment and decree impugned, before this Court, is, affirmed and maintained. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. All pending applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs. Records be sent back forthwith.