A claimant reimbursed for medical expenditure through a mediclaim policy cannot claim compensation for the same from the insurer of the offending vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act.

G. P. MITTAL, J.

1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of Rs.14,19,000/-awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) for the injuries suffered by Swatantrata Sharma, the First Respondent in a motor accident which occurred on 04.02.2009.

2. The only ground of challenge is that out of an amount of Rs.11,50,000/- awarded towards medical treatment, special diet and conveyance, a sum of Rs.4,35,000/-was reimbursed to the First Respondent under the mediclaim policy.

3. It is urged that the said benefit having accrued to the First Respondent on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the same was liable to be deducted from the cost of treatment paid to the First Respondent.

4. On the other hand, it is urged by the learned counsel for the First Respondent that an amount of Rs.4,35,000/- was paid by the Insurance Company on account of obtaining a mediclaim policy for which the First Respondent paid the premium. The Appellant being a tortfeasor cannot get any benefit from the policy obtained by the First Respondent.

5. It is urged that the compensation awarded towards permanent disability on assuming the income of Rs.3,000/- (towards gratuitous services rendered by a housewife) on the basis of Lata Wadhwa & Ors. v.State of Bihar & Ors., (2001) 8 SCC 197 is on the lower side. It is urged that this accident occurred in the year 2009 whereas in Lata Wadhwa (supra) the accident occurred in the year 1989.

6. This Appeal is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in MAC APP.191/2010 titled Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ganpat Rai Sehgal & Ors. decided on 03.01.2012 wherein this Court noticed United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Patricia Jean Mahajan (2002) 6 SCC 281; Gobald Motor Service Ltd. & Anr. v. R.M.K. Veluswami and Ors., AIR 1962 SC 1; Helen C. Rebello v. Maharashtra S.R.T.C., (1999) 1 SCC 90; Jitendra v. Rahul (2008) (5) MPHT 336; and Udam Singh Sethi v. Tamal Das and Ors. MAC. APP. No. 369/2006 decided on 26.10.2009; and held that the Claimant would not be entitled to the medical expenditure which has been reimbursed to him under the mediclaim policy.

7. Thus, a Claimant who has been reimbursed for the medical expenditure incurred by him (due to a motor accident) through his mediclaim policy, will not be again entitled to claim compensation for the same from the insurer of the offending vehicle, in a claim filed under the Motor Vehicles Act.

8. Applying the same principle to the instance case, the first Respondent cannot benefit twice i.e. she cannot recover the compensation from the tortfeasor for which she has already been compensated by her mediclaim policy. Therefore, the Claims Tribunal erred in not deducting a sum of Rs.4,35,000/- which was admittedly paid to the first Respondent under the mediclaim policy. The said amount is liable to be deducted from the amount of Rs. 11,50,000/- paid towards the medical treatment.

9. The Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,44,000/- taking 45% disability in respect of right lower limb to be 50% disability in carrying out normal household work by the first Respondent. The same is not disputed by the Appellant during the course of arguments.

10. The value of domestic services rendered by a housewife was dealt with at great length by this Court in Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Master Manmeet Singh & Ors., MAC.APP. 590/2011, decided on 30th January, 2012. This Court noticed the following judgments of the Supreme Court:-

(i) General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors. (1994) 2 SCC 176,

(ii) National Insurance Company Limited v. Deepika & Ors., 2010 (4) ACJ 2221,

(iii) Amar Singh Thukral v. Sandeed Chhatwal, ILR (2004) 2 Del 1,

(iv) Lata Wadhwa & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., (2001) 8 SCC 197,

(v) Gobald Motor Service Ltd. & Anr. v. R.M.K. Veluswami & Ors., AIR 1962 SC 1,

(vi) A. Rajam v. M. Manikya Reddy & Anr., MANU/AP/0303/1988,