Heard both sides.

Sri.Arunkumar Amargundappa, learned counsel

for the review petitioner has submitted that judgment of

this

Court

dated

24.09.2019

passed

in

MFA

No.201065/2017 deserves to be reviewed for the reason

that counsel for the petitioners was not at all aware of the

disposal of the above appeal and was under impression

that matter is still pending for consideration.

Further it is submitted that in fact driver of the

offending vehicle was holding valid and effective driving

licence to drive the vehicle. Even if it is presumed that the

driver of the vehicle was not having the driving licence

then also principle of pay and recover is applicable in view

of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of PAPPU DEO

YADAV VS. NARESH KUMAR AND ORS reported in AIR

- 4 -

2020 SC 4424. Further is submitted that in para 7 of the

judgment of this Court, it has observed as under:

"7.

The insurance company has raised

an objection that driver of the car bearing

Reg.No.KA-35/MB-6093 was not having valid

and proper driving license and there are breach

of terms."

4.

In para 8 this Court has clearly observed that

though the contentions are taken, the same are not

established in a way inspi