Back
SANJAY KAROL, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Kanika – Respondent
Final Decision of the Court: Appeals allowed. The Order in Review dated 15th October 2024 is set aside, and the Main Order dated 18th September 2019 is restored. (!) [8]
The amount received by the claimant-respondents under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006, is to be deducted from the compensation awarded as modified by the Main Order. (!) [8]
The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal remains unchanged, payable from the date of institution of the claim petition. (!) [8]
Claimant-respondents are directed to file an affidavit before the Tribunal indicating the sum received under the 2006 Rules (if any), enabling the Tribunal to make suitable orders for disbursal. Upon such order, the sum shall be released to the claimant-respondents within six weeks. If no amount is received or receivable under the 2006 Rules, claimants are entitled to the entire amount per the Main Order. (!) [8]
Details of the claimant-respondents' bank account to be supplied to the appellant by respective counsel before the Tribunal on 27th February 2026. (!) [8]
A copy of the judgment to be sent to the Registrar General of the Punjab and Haryana High Court for compliance. (!) (!)
Pending applications stand closed; no order as to costs. (!) (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the accident and initial compensation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding deduction of compensation. (Para 5) |
| 3. court analysis of previous rulings related to deductions. (Para 6) |
| 4. procedural limits on modifying compensation orders. (Para 7) |
| 5. final order on compensation adjustments. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL, J.
Leave Granted.
2. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited has filed these appeals questioning the correctness of final judgments and orders dated 15th October 20241[Order in Review] passed in CM NO.16984 of 2024 and 17th January 20232[Clarification Order] passed in CM No.13449 of 2021, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The order dated 15th October 2024 was an order passed in Review of the latter. The order dated 17th January 2023 was a consequence of a clarification having been sought of order dated 18th September 2019 passed by the High Court in FAO No.2017 of 20113[Main Order].
3. The facts as necessary for disposal of the appeal are: On 2nd November 2009, a motorcycle being driven by Ravinder Kumar, carrying two pillion riders, Smt. Hom Devi and Kanika respondent no.1 herein collided with a jeep, on account
(1) Compensation – Deduction is permissible only to the extent that financial assistance overlaps with same pecuniary loss for which compensation is awarded under MVA, most notably loss of income.(2)....
Compensation for loss of dependency must not deduct pension or personal expenses; future prospects should be included, with the correct multiplier applied.
Compensation under the Haryana Rules must be fully deducted from Motor Vehicles Act claims, as established by precedent, ensuring no double recovery for dependents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
