Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court disposed of an appeal filed by The Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. against an order of the High Court which directed the insurer to provide prosthetic limbs and a motorized wheelchair to the victim, Suraj Kumar, and ensure their proper functioning. The victim, a 22-year-old cleaner, suffered an accident on 21.12.2008 while traveling in his employer's tempo, which hit a stationary tanker due to rash and negligent driving. He sustained severe injuries resulting in amputation of one lower limb and 90% impairment of both lower limbs. The Motor Accident Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.16,34,400 with 9% interest, adopting 100% functional disability. The claimant appealed to the High Court, which passed the impugned order directing the insurer to provide prosthetic limbs and a wheelchair and monitor them. The insurer appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that its liability is only to indemnify the loss of estate in monetary terms, not to ensure future wellbeing. The Supreme Court agreed with the insurer, holding that the High Court's order was beyond the insurer's duty. However, to avoid remand and considering the accident occurred almost 15 years ago, the Court computed the monetary compensation for future medical expenses: prosthetic limbs costing Rs.2 lakhs each, replaceable every five years (requiring at least five replacements), totaling Rs.10 lakhs, and a wheelchair costing Rs.40,000, also replaceable every five years, totaling Rs.2 lakhs. The Court directed the insurer to pay an additional Rs.12 lakhs with simple interest at 6% within two months, setting aside the High Court's order. The Court clarified that it was not increasing the award but stating it in monetary terms as prayed by the insurer. The appeal was disposed of with directions for payment.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Compensation - Insurer's Liability - Scope of Indemnity - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 168 - The insurer's liability is to indemnify the loss of estate of the insured in monetary terms by way of pecuniary compensation as awarded by the Tribunal. The High Court cannot direct the insurer to provide prosthetic limbs and a wheelchair and monitor their functioning, as such obligations go beyond the insurer's duty. The proper course is to compute monetary compensation covering mobility aids and future wellbeing. (Paras 3-6) B) Motor Accident Compensation - Just Compensation - Computation of Future Medical Expenses - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 168 - For a victim with 90% disability and amputation of lower limbs, the court estimated the cost of prosthetic limbs at Rs.2 lakhs each, requiring replacement every five years, and a wheelchair at Rs.40,000, also replaceable every five years. Considering the victim's age (22 years), the court awarded Rs.10 lakhs for prosthetic limbs and Rs.2 lakhs for wheelchair, totaling Rs.12 lakhs as additional compensation with 6% simple interest. (Paras 7-8) C) Motor Accident Compensation - Enhancement by Appellate Court - Powers of Supreme Court - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 173 - Even though the appeal was filed by the insurer challenging the High Court's order, the Supreme Court can enhance the compensation in monetary terms to avoid remand, especially when the accident occurred almost 15 years ago. The court set aside the High Court's order and decided the claimant's appeal for enhancement by awarding additional monetary compensation. (Paras 8-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an insurance company can be directed to provide prosthetic limbs and a motorized wheelchair to a victim and ensure their proper functioning, or whether its liability is limited to monetary compensation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the insurance company to pay an additional amount of Rs.12 lakhs with simple interest at 6% within two months, to be deposited/transferred to the victim's account after deducting amounts already paid. The appeal was disposed of.
Law Points
- Insurer's liability is to indemnify loss of estate in monetary terms
- not to ensure future wellbeing of victim
- 'just compensation' includes monetary computation for prosthetic limbs
- wheelchair
- and future medical expenses
- High Court cannot direct insurer to provide prosthetic limbs and wheelchair and monitor their functioning
- compensation can be enhanced in appeal by insurer if it results in monetary quantification.
