Page 54 - The Insurance Times March 2025

Legal Briefs

SC asks 23 states, 7 UTs to file compli- Cut mediclaim sum from crash victim's

ance reports of road safety provisions relief: SC
In a significant order, the Supreme Court directed 23 states The amount received by an accident victim under a
and seven union territories to file compliance reports indi- mediclaim policy must be deducted from the total compen-
cating implementation of the Motor Vehicle law's recent sation under the head of medical expenses and
provisions besides rules on electronic monitoring and road hospitalisation charges, Karnataka HC has held based on
safety measures. A bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka Motor Vehicles Act.
and Ujjal Bhuyan noted six states and a UT, namely, West Justice Hanchate Sanjeev Kumar directed Oriental Insurance
Bengal, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Company to pay Rs 4.93 lakh along with interest of 6 per
Delhi, had filed their compliance reports.
cent a year to the family of S Hanumanthappa, a resident
The top court on September 2, 2024 passed directions on of Marathahalli in Bengaluru, after deducting Rs 1.8 lakh
the implementation of Section 136A of the Motor Vehicles he had received from mediclaim. Hanumanthappa and his
Act read with Rule 167A of the Motor Vehicles Rules which wife were travelling on a bike on Dec 10, 2008 when an
allow authorities to electronically monitor speeding vehicles. autorickshaw dashed against them. He suffered fractures
The bench has now asked the remaining 23 states and seven and was treated in various hospitals.
UTS to file their compliance reports which will be shared with He moved the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru.
the Supreme Court committee on road safety.
He claimed he was aged about 58 years, working as a
The apex court panel, in turn, would look into all aspects teacher, and was drawing a salary of Rs 10,000 per month.
and provide its inputs which could be considered by the On March 22, 2013, the tribunal awarded Rs 6.7 lakh, in-
Centre in framing the standard operating procedure on elec- cluding Rs 5.2 lakh under the head of medical expenses.
tronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety measures,
The insurer challenged the order, contending that Rs 5.2
the bench said.
lakh medical expenses was not correct, as Hanumanthappa
Senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal, assisting the bench as an got mediclaim reimbursements earlier.
amicus curiae, informed the bench that six states had filed Justice Sanjeev Kumar cited another Karnataka HC case in
their reports and the necessary directions may be passed
which the court had held that if the claimant got his medi-
with regard to them. The bench said it would consider the
cal expenses reimbursed, they can be deducted from acci-
aspect on March 25 and its panel on road safety, in the dent compensation.
meantime, could seek assistance of the six states while de-
liberating upon the reports. "Therefore, in the present case, the amount received by the
claimant under mediclaim is liable to be deducted from
Section 136A, introduced in 2021 in the Motor Vehicles Act,
medical expenses while determining the compensation un-
1988, aims to deploy advanced technologies such as speed der the said head. The appellant (insurer) has produced
cameras, closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, speed evidence that the claimant received a mediclaim reimburse-
guns, body-worn cameras, and automatic number plate
ment amount of Rs 1.8 lakh. This fact is not disputed by the
recognition systems to ensure better traffic management respondents/claimants," the judge said. The HC ordered a
and enforcement of traffic laws. deduction of Rs 1.8 lakh from Rs 5.2 lakh awarded as medi-

48 March 2025 The Insurance Times