Medical expenses reimbursed under health insurance cannot be deducted from motor accident compensation.

In brief

The question

1. Whether the claimant was entitled to enhancement of compensation for her injuries, medical expenses, and loss of income during the laid-up period

The court held

The appeal was allowed in part.

It also directed

The Court enhanced the total compensation from ₹1,00,000 to ₹2,68,602, granting an additional ₹1,68,602 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization

The first respondent, the vehicle’s owner, was directed to deposit the enhanced amount and interest before the Tribunal within two months; the claimant was entitled to release of the entire enhanced compensation

01Facts

The claimant sustained a lacerated wound and an open fracture with dislocation of the third toe of her right foot in a road traffic accident on 2 November 2021

p. 4 · ¶ 6

The Tribunal awarded her global compensation of ₹1,00,000, with interest at 6% per annum, and directed the first respondent, the vehicle’s owner, to pay it

p. 3 · ¶ 3 · p. 4 · ¶ 4

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement

pp. 2–3 · p. 3 · ¶ 1

She relied on medical bills totalling ₹83,072, stated that she had received health-insurance reimbursement, and produced evidence of 45 days of earned leave and a monthly salary of ₹67,000

p. 5 · ¶ 9 · p. 6 · ¶ 11

02Issues

i.1. Whether the claimant was entitled to enhancement of compensation for her injuries, medical expenses, and loss of income during the laid-up period

pp. 5–7 · ¶ 7–13

ii.2. Whether medical expenses reimbursed under a health-insurance policy could be excluded from the compensation award

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 9–10

03Law Applied

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against an award of a Claims Tribunal

pp. 2–3

The Court applied the Supreme Court’s decision in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Dolly Satish Gandhi and another, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 504, for the rule that medical expenses reimbursed under a health-insurance policy cannot be deducted when assessing compensation for medical expenses

p. 5 · ¶ 10

The judgment does not identify any other specific statutory provision or precedent governing the assessment of the remaining compensation heads

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Court assessed compensation by reference to the injuries and evidence before it. It awarded ₹50,000 for pain and suffering and ₹30,000 for loss of amenities, and allowed ₹5,000 for attendant, conveyance, food and nourishment charges based on the claimant’s five-day hospital admission

p. 5 · ¶ 7–8

Applying Dolly Satish Gandhi, it allowed the full ₹83,072 in medical expenses despite the health-insurance reimbursement

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 9–10

It also accepted the salary slip and earned-leave evidence and calculated loss of income for 45 days at ₹2,234 per day, totalling ₹1,00,530

p. 6 · ¶ 11

These heads amounted to total compensation of ₹2,68,602

p. 6 · ¶ 12

05Holding

The appeal was allowed in part.

pp. 7–8 · ¶ 13–14

The Court enhanced the total compensation from ₹1,00,000 to ₹2,68,602, granting an additional ₹1,68,602 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization

pp. 7–8 · ¶ 13–14

p. 8 · ¶ 14

LawLens.Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF