(1.) Heard Mr. A. Kakodkar, learned counsel for the Appellant.
(2.) Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, i.e., the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, have not yet been served despite several opportunities. Accordingly, the appeal is liable to be dismissed against the said respondents.
(3.) However, Mr. Kakodkar was heard on his contentions concerning the respondent Nos.3 and 4. He submitted that the driver had no valid license, which amounted to a breach of the insurance policy.