Case Details

  • Case Name: Sarla Devi & Ors. vs. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited & Ors.
  • Civil Appeal No.: ………… of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 13979 of 2018)
  • Court: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
  • Judgment Date: 27 May 2026 (order dated 26 May 2026)
  • Relevant Timeline: Accident on 23 July 2012; Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award on 23 February 2015; High Court modification on 12 September 2017; Supreme Court final order on 26 May 2026.

Parties Involved

  • Appellants: Sarla Devi (widow), minor daughter of the deceased, mother of the deceased, father of the deceased (father later held not a dependent).
  • Respondents: Reliance General Insurance Company Limited (insurer) and other parties.
  • Senior Counsel for Appellants: Mr. Rameshwar Singh Malik.
  • Senior Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Joy Basu.
  • Bench: Justice Vijay Bishnoi (author), Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta.

Issues / Allegations / Violations

1. Whether the ex‑gratia financial assistance payable under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 must be deducted from compensation awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to avoid dual recovery.

2. Whether the mother of the deceased is eligible for such financial assistance under the 2006 Rules.

3. Determination of the final quantum of compensation payable to each dependent under the Act.

Findings & Observations

  • The 2006 Rules provide financial assistance equal to the last drawn salary (₹16,230 per month) for a period of 15 years to the widow and minor daughter, amounting to ₹29,21,400; parents are eligible only if no widow or child survives.
  • The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s deduction of the ₹29,21,400 assistance from the total award, citing Shashi Sharma precedent that prevents overlapping compensation for loss of income.
  • The mother is not eligible for assistance under the 2006 Rules because the deceased left a widow and a child, as clarified by the 1964 Family Pension Scheme and reinforced by Ram Kala Devi judgment.
  • The Tribunal’s computation of loss of dependency (salary ₹16,230 + 50% future prospects, multiplier 18) yielding ₹33,91,800 was accepted, with the correct deduction of annual income‑tax liability of ₹9,490.
  • The High Court’s total award before set‑off was ₹36,91,800 (including loss of consortium, loss of love & affection, funeral expenses, loss of estate). After deducting the 2006 Rules assistance, the net amount became ₹7,70,400.
  • The mother’s share of loss of dependency is one‑third of ₹33,91,800, i.e., ₹11,30,600.

Penalties / Settlements / Directions

  • Respondents (Reliance General Insurance Company Limited) are jointly and severally liable to pay:
  • ₹11,30,600 to the mother (Appellant No. 3).
  • The previously awarded ₹7,70,400 to the other claimants (widow, daughter, and mother’s share of loss of dependency already accounted).
  • The cumulative compensation payable under the Act is therefore ₹19,01,000.
  • Interest on the awarded amount shall accrue as determined by the Tribunal and upheld by the High Court.
  • Payment must be made within eight weeks from the date of this Supreme Court order.

Corrective Actions & Future Obligations

  • The insurer must complete the payment of the stipulated amounts within the eight‑week deadline.
  • No further procedural steps or compliance measures were ordered beyond the payment obligation.

Final Ruling & Enforcement

  • The appeal is disposed of; all pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
  • The Supreme Court’s direction to pay the total compensation of ₹19,01,000, together with interest, is enforceable and binding on the respondents.
  • The judgment clarifies the interplay between statutory financial assistance under the 2006 Rules and compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, setting a precedent for future similar claims.