1. Heard on the question of admission.

2. Placing reliance on the law laid down by the apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and others [2005 (1) JLJ 85 = (2004) 3 SCC 297] it is contended that since the driver of the offending vehicle was having a driving licence, the Insurance Company could not have been exonerated. The apex Court in the case of Swaran Singh (supra) has clearly observed:

"To avoid its liability towards the insured, the insurer has to prove that the insured was guilty of negligence and failed to exercise reasonable care in the matter of fulfilling the condition of the policy regarding use of vehicles by a duly licensed driver or one who was not disqualified to drive at the relevant time."

3. In the present case, it was observed by the Claims Tribunal in paragraphs-8 and 9 of the impugned award that the deceased was found aged 30 years in the medical examination performed during investigation of the Criminal Case. Driving licence was shown to have been issued in the year 1973. Since, the accident occurred in the year 1998, driver must be aged 15 years in the year 1973 when the driving licence is shown to have been issued.

On perusal, it is found that the column of date of birth in the driving licence is blank. Insured ought to have taken requisite care to seek verification of the age of the driver by requiring him to submit any proof, since, the column of date of birth was blank in the driving licence. There is nothing on record to show that any such reasonable care was taken by the insured to verify the date of birth or age of the driver on 9.5.1973 when the driving licence is shown to have been issued. This clearly amounts to negligence and absence of reasonable care on the part of the insured. This being the case, the petitioner does not get any assistance from the apex Court decision.

4. It is further submitted that accident occurred due to the mechanical fault of the offending vehicle and not due to any negligence on the part of the driver. Accordingly, it is contended that the driving licence shall have no role so as to seek exoneration of the Insurance Company. He derives strength from clause (vi) ofparagraph-110 of the aforesaid apex Court decision. Since, it has already been observed that the applicant did not raise any such ground in the appeal, it cannot be considered in the present review petition, that the main cause of accident was negligence or mechanical failure. It may be noticed that the case is at the stage of review petition, no such ground was raised in the original appeal.

Therefore, the same is not liable to be considered at this stage because it cannot be treated as an error apparent on the face of record.

5. In the result, I do not find any substance in the review petition and the same is hereby dismissed summarily.