The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that merely because the claimant was examined one year after the date of the accident cannot discard the medical evidence that he was permanently disabled. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 402]

Enhancing the award granted to the claimant, the bench of Justice BP Sharma stated;

"this Court finds that the learned Tribunal declined to accept the claim of permanent disability mainly on the ground that Dr. Navin Kothari had examined the appellant after about one year from the date of the accident. In the considered opinion of this Court, merely because the appellant was examined by the doctor after one year of the accident cannot discard the medical evidence regarding permanent disability, particularly when the appellant had sustained a fracture of the patella bone and had undergone prolonged treatment". 

The claimant had filed an appeal challenging the award of March 29, 2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal wherein he was awarded compensation of ₹63,970. 

Per the facts, the claimant had sustained injuries and a fracture in his patella bone. He was admitted to multiple hospitals and underwent prolonged treatment. The Tribunal, while granting his compensation, rejected his claim of permanent disability. The counsel for the claimant argued that the Tribunal failed to consider the testimony of Dr Navin Kothari, who assessed the permanent disability of the claimant at 60%.

The counsel for the Insurance Company argued that the claimant failed to establish his case with reliable evidence. 

The court noted that the Tribunal declined to accept claim of permanent diability merely because the claiminat was examined by the said doctor one year after date of the accident. The bench noted that his evidence regarding permanent disability cannot be discredited merely because he was medically examined by Dr Kothari one year after the accident. 

The court also noted that the claimant had incurred ₹70,000 towards his medical treatment and was only granted ₹63,970 by the Tribunal. Therefore, the bench enhanced the award by an additional amount of ₹50,000. Accordingly, the appeal was partly allowed. 

For Appellant: Advocate Ramprakash Shivhare

For Insurance Company: Advocate Kuldeep Rathore

For Respondents: Advocate Shreyash Pandit