How must compassionate assistance under the Haryana Rules of 2006 be treated in a motor-accident claim?

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Haryana Compassionate Assistance to Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 — r.5 — Deduction of compassionate assistance — Just compensation — Held: In computing just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, the financial assistance equivalent to the pay and allowances last drawn, received by the dependents under the Rules of 2006, must be excluded in full and cannot be paid over a second time; other benefits such as family pension, provident fund and life insurance remain unaffected and are not liable to be deducted. (¶5) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Rules of 2006 — Fifty per cent deduction — Setting aside — No recovery — Held further: The High Court erred in deducting only fifty per cent of the compensation payable under the Rules of 2006; the judgment is set aside to that extent and the amount falls to be deducted in full, subject to the clarification that no recovery shall be made of sums already paid to the claimants. (¶7) Constitution of India — Art. 141 — Binding precedent — High Court following its own contrary view — Held further: A High Court which, despite noticing a binding decision of this Court, declines to follow its dictum and instead follows a contrary judgment of its own acts per se in violation of Article 141. Appeal allowed. (¶8)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

LexStreak turns the Supreme Court's output into a five-minute daily read for advocates — plain-language headnotes, the questions each judgment settles, and the full text when you need it.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

“26. …The Claims Tribunal has to adjudicate the claim and determine the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just. The amount receivable by the dependents/claimants towards the head of pay and allowances in the form of ex-gratia financial assistance, therefore, cannot be paid for the second time to the claimants. True it is, that the Rules of 2006 would come into play if the Government employee dies in harness even due to natural death. At the same time, the Rules of 2006 do not expressly enable the dependents of the deceased Government employee to claim similar amount from the tortfeasor or Insurance Company because of the accidental death of the deceased Government employee. The harmonious approach for determining a just compensation payable under the Act of 1988, therefore, is to exclude the amount received or receivable by the dependents of the deceased Government employee under the Rules of 2006 towards the head financial assistance equivalent to “pay and other allowances” that was last drawn by the deceased Government employee in the normal course. This is not to say that the amount or payment receivable by the dependents of the deceased Government employee under Rule 5 (1) of the Rules, is the total entitlement under the head of “loss of income”. So far as the claim towards loss of future escalation of income and other benefits, if the deceased Government employee had survived the accident can still be pursued by them in their claim under the Act of 1988. For, it is not covered by the Rules of 2006. Similarly, other benefits extended to the dependents of the deceased Government employee in terms of sub-rule (2) to sub-rule (5) of Rule 5 including family pension, Life Insurance, Provident Fund etc., that must remain unaffected and cannot be allowed to be deducted, which, any way would be paid to the dependents of the deceased Government employee, applying the principle expounded in Helen C. Rebello v. Maharashtra SRTC, (1999) 1 SCC 90 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Patricia Jean Mahanan, (2002) 6 SCC 281 cases.”

“However, this amount alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment, will be payable subject to the outcome of the application made by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to the competent authority for grant of financial assistance under the Rules of 2006. If that application is allowed and the amount becomes payable towards financial assistance under the said Rules to the specified legal representatives of the deceased, commensurate amount will have to be deducted from the compensation amount along with interest component thereon. The respondent Nos.1 and 2, therefore, can be permitted to withdraw the compensation amount only upon filing of an affidavit-cum-declaration before the executing Court that they have not received nor would claim any amount towards financial assistance under the Rules of 2006 and if already received or to be received in future on that account, the amount so received will be disclosed to the executing Court, which will have to be deducted from the compensation amount determined in terms of this order”.