Subsequent Declaration Of Juvenility Does Not Vitiate Conviction On Merits: Supreme Court Borrowers Cannot Ignore Bank Accounting Systems And Suspense Accounts To Claim Arbitrary Reductions In Loan Dues: Supreme Court Re-employed Judicial Officers Cannot Claim 6th Pay Commission Scales: Supreme Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Erroneously Exercising Review Jurisdiction On 'Mistaken Notion', Restores Employee's ACP Benefits Trademark Infringement: Defendant Can Cross-Examine Plaintiff On Use Of Brand Name Even If Written Statement Is Not On Record: Supreme Court 'Interest And Welfare Of Child Would Be Best Served': Supreme Court Invokes Parens Patriae In Contempt Plea; Revokes Own Custody Order Mere Absence From MCA Records Cannot Absolve Accused Under Section 138 NI Act If Prima Facie Role Is Shown: Punjab & Haryana High Court Incomplete Or Defective Real Estate Application Cannot Claim Deemed Registration Under Section 5(2) Of RERA Act: Orissa High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Cannot Justify Invoking 'Organized Crime' Offence Under Section 111 BNS Without Fulfilling Statutory Ingredients: Madhya Pradesh High Court 'Testator's Character & Prior Gifts Justify Unequal Distribution': Madras High Court Upholds Holographic Will Minority Status Cannot Arrest Limitation Period For Appeal If Minor Was Represented By Natural Guardian In Original Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Admission Of Property Boundaries In Family Partition Deeds Destroys Coparceners' Claim That Land Remains Joint Ancestral Property: Karnataka High Court Mesne Profits Must Reflect Open Market Letting Value Rather Than Static Contractual Rates: Delhi High Court Law Graduates Who Fail To Clear AIBE Within Two Years Cannot Practice In Any Court, Tribunal Or Revenue Authority: Allahabad High Court Bombay High Court Slams 'Growing Tendency' To Bypass GST Appeals, Says 'Natural Justice' Not A Blanket Excuse For Writ Petitions Proportionate Cost Only Can Be Awarded On Decreed Amount, Not On Total Plaint Valuation: Kerala High Court

Supreme Court Orders Insurance Company to Reimburse Medical Expenses Incurred in Accident, Calls Insurance Company’s Conduct “Unfair and Unjust”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of the insured, Hem Raj, ordering The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. To indemnify the total amount of INR 10,36,500/- for an accident that occurred in Nepal. The Court found the insurance company’s conduct “unfair and unjust” for denying reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by the insured towards the treatment of an injured third-party involved in the accident.

The case involved an accident on 11th September 2014, in Nepal, where the insured’s vehicle was driven by someone else and resulted in the death of Smt. Santliya Tharu and injuries to Ram Parshad Tharu. The insurance policy covered the territory of India and Nepal, and the insured sought reimbursement for various expenses incurred.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) initially disallowed the indemnification of medical expenses, citing “no evidence on record.” However, on appeal, the Supreme Court found medical bills (Exhibits P-9 to P-28) on record supporting the medical expenses incurred by the insured. The Court criticized the insurance company’s incorrect submissions before the NCDRC, which led to the denial of reimbursement, and termed the insurer’s conduct as “not fair and just.”

Hon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna, who delivered the judgment, stated, The submissions made on behalf of the insurance company before the NCDRC are contrary to the evidence on record as a result of which the appellant herein has been not only deprived of the aforesaid amount spent by him towards medical expenses but also has been constrained to approach this Court. We find that the stand of the insurer in this case is not fair and just.”

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and directed The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. To pay the insured the amount of INR 4,09,000/- for medical expenses, along with 7% interest per annum from the date of filing the complaint before the District Forum. Additionally, a nominal cost of INR 30,000/- was imposed on the insurance company.

 Date of Decision: 25th July, 2023

HEM RAJ vs THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/25-Jul-2023_Hemraj_Vs_India_Assurance.pdf"]

Latest Legal News