Karuna Parmar v. Prakash Sinha 2025 INSC 1244 - Motor Accident Compensation Medical Expenses
Motor Accident Compensation - Limiting the amount payable for medical expenses to the bills presented would be unreasonable to the aggrieved party. [Context: SC disagreed with MACT reasoning that that the amount payable for medical expenses should be restricted to the bills produced by the claimant]
Case Info
Case Details
- Case name: Karuna Parmar v. Prakash Sinha & Ors.; with Ramchand Singh Parmar v. Prakash Sinha & Ors.
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1244
- Coram: Justice Sanjay Karol; Justice Manmohan
- Judgment date: February 11, 2025
- Court: Supreme Court of India (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
- Appeal source: Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 6428/2023 and 6314/2023; against MP High Court judgment dated December 16, 2022 in Misc. Appeal Nos. 651 & 653 of 2021; which arose from MACT awards dated March 7, 2020 in M.A.C.C. Nos. 500099, 500100, 500098 of 2015.
Caselaws and Citations
- National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, paras 42 & 59.
- Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, (2020) 4 SCC 413, paras 19 & 25.
- Sidram v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Ltd., (2023) 3 SCC 439, para 89.
- K.S. Muralidhar v. R. Subbulakshmi & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3385, paras 13–14.
- Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343, para 6.
- Baby Sakshi Greola v. Manzoor Ahmad Simon & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3692 (referred as 2022 SCC OnLine SC 3692 within table).
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Delhi minimum wages for skilled worker cited by analogy; MP notification used for 2014 at Rs.223/day).
- Motor Vehicles compensation principles: future prospects, multiplier, conventional heads, consortium—applied per Pranay Sethi and subsequent SC jurisprudence.
💡
Though this is a judgment delivered in February 2025, this was uploaded in the Supreme Court Website this week.