If MACT Doubts Correctness Of Medical Certificate, It Can Have It Reasessed; But It Can’t By Itself Go Into Details of Determination Of Disability: SC
The appeal before the Apex Court was filed at the instance of a motor accident claimant-appellant against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court.
The Supreme Court granted enhanced compensation of over Rs 48 lakh in a case of motor accident and held that if the Tribunal had reason to doubt the medical certificate, the option available before it was to have the disability re-assessed but it could not have gone into the details of the determination of disability.
The appeal before the Apex Court was filed at the instance of the claimant-appellant aggrieved by the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in a motor accident claim case. The claimant-appellant was aggrieved by the fact that the opinion of the Medical Board computing disability had been ignored and the Tribunal had substituted its own view.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Manmohan said, “The finding of 100% disability, therefore, appears to be justified. As such, the compensation ought to be recomputed.”
AOR Anuj Bhandari represented the Appellant while AOR Prerna Mehta represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The incident is of the year 2014 when the claimant-appellant was returning to his village on his motorcycle when another vehicle, a Maruti Omni came from the opposite direction, on the wrong side of the road. The claimant appellant suffered numerous injuries including on the head and his right leg. An FIR was registered and he was taken to the Hospital. Although he survived his accident, he is in a comatose state.
The Tribunal found that the Maruti Omni had indeed been responsible for the accident, being driven at high speed and negligently. A total amount of Rs 16,29,465 was awarded by the Tribunal. The issue of liability of the insurance company was decided against them. On appeal, the High Court held that no neurosurgeon and treating doctor were produced by the claimant to prove a hundred per cent disability of the claimant before the Tribunal. As per the High Court, the Tribunal rightly assessed the disability of the injured to the extent of 50%. The High Court enhanced the compensation receivable by the claimant to Rs 19,39,418. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant approached the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Bench noticed that the duly constituted Medical Board had ascertained the permanent disability of the claimant appellant to be 100%. The Tribunal questioned the competence of the Medical Board to assess the permanent disability of the claimant-appellant, terming the certificate of the Medical Board as not completely reliable.
“If the Tribunal had reason to doubt the medical certificate, the option available before it was to have the disability re-assessed but it could not have gone into the details of the determination of disability. Since that course of action has not been adopted, the opinion of the Medical Board, being an opinion of the experts is to be treated as such. That apart, the comatose state of the claimant-appellant is not in dispute”, it said.
The medical report clearly stated that the claimant-appellant has no speech or intellectual functions. He cannot stand or walk and has a catheter. Further, he is dependent entirely on others for daily activities. These aspects substantiated the claim of 100% disability. “It is also to be noted that for a person in coma, who is entirely dependent on others, obviously a meagre sum of Rs.2,00,000/- stands awarded by the Tribunal towards mental and physical agony, pain, and loss of amenities. The High Court has also confirmed the same. We find the same to be Insufficient”, the Bench asserted.
Referring to the judgment in K.S Murlidhar v. R. Subbulakshmi (2024) and having due regard to the age, nature of disability and other relevant factors, the Bench allowed the appeal, enhanced the compensation and awarded a sum of Rs 48,70,000 with interest.
Cause Title: Prakash Chand Sharma v. Rambabu Saini & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 180)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR Anuj Bhandari
Respondent: AOR Prerna Mehta
