The Bombay Excessive Court docket lately held that medical reimbursement acquired from a motor accident sufferer’s insurance coverage firm can’t be deducted from the compensation to be paid by the insurance coverage firm of the proprietor of the offending car.
Justice Shivkumar Dige upheld an award by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to an accident sufferer who acquired medical reimbursement below his father’s Mediclaim coverage.
“The Appellant/Insurance coverage Firm can’t declare deduction of the quantity for which separate premium was paid by totally different particular person below totally different contractual legal responsibility. The Appellant/Insurance coverage Firm is liable to indemnify the contractual legal responsibility between them and proprietor of offending car. So, the quantity acquired below contractual legal responsibility is totally different quantity of medical reimbursement, it can’t be deducted from the quantity which the appellants are liable to pay as compensation”, the courtroom held.
In March 2014, one Aman Tak was continuing on a bike together with a good friend. A motor dumper collided with the bike leading to accidents to the bike riders.
Tak claimed that he suffered partial everlasting incapacity of neurological nature and has issue in strolling, reminiscence loss, and issue in sustaining steadiness.
The Motor Accidents Declare Tribunal awarded him a compensation together with medical bills of Rs. 14,44,314/-. Reliance Basic Insurance coverage, the insurer of the offending dumper, challenged the award within the current attraction.
Advocate Shalini Shankar for Reliance contended that the claimant has acquired medical reimbursement of Rs.12,17,592/- from one other insurance coverage firm below the Mediclaim coverage. Thus, he’s not entitled to obtain medical reimbursement from Reliance. The quantity acquired below the Mediclaim coverage needs to be deducted from the compensation quantity, Shankar contended.
Advocate Jitendra P. Gor for the claimant Aman Tak submitted that the coverage was taken by Tak’s father for the household and on that foundation he acquired the medical reimbursement.
The courtroom famous that the claimant’s father paid separate premium for the Mediclaim coverage whereas the proprietor of the offending car paid premium to his insurance coverage firm.
The courtroom stated that the contractual legal responsibility between the accident sufferer and one other insurance coverage firm is totally different from the contractual legal responsibility between proprietor of offending car and its insurance coverage firm. The 2 contractual liabilities can’t be held at an equal footing, the courtroom held.
Subsequently, the car’s insurance coverage firm can’t declare deduction of the quantity acquired by the sufferer below separate insurance coverage, the courtroom held and dismissed the attraction.
Case no. – First Attraction No. 1051 Of 2022
Case Title – Reliance Basic Insurance coverage Co. Ltd. v. Aman Sanjay Tak and Anr.
Adblock check (Why?)