1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant, who is the claimant before the Court below, assailing the judgment of XXII Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal Court, Hyderabad in O.P. No. 1597 of 2006, dated 04.01.2008, on the ground that the Court below erred in not directing the insurance company to pay the award amount and recover the same from the insurer.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for the respondents does not appear.

3. The Court below did not fix any liability on the insurance company as it was proved that the driver of the vehicle did not have valid driving license on the date of accident.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant only seeks for a direction to the insurance company to pay the award amount and recover the same from the owner.

"This is not a case of no licence. It is a case of the driver not having appropriate driving licence. Cases of this sort went to the Supreme Court several times. The anguish about the insurers approaching the Supreme Court, without minding the rulings of the Court, was expressed by the Supreme Court in Lehru's case 2003 (2) SCR 495 in the following words As is indicated hereafter the question whether a