Supreme Court : Motor accident claim tribunal should include HRA,PF contribution and other perquisites to salary of deceased before considering his annual income for grant of compensation

The amounts, therefore, which were required to be paid to the deceased by his employer by way of perks, should be included for computation of his monthly income as that would have been added to his monthly income by way of contribution to the family as contradistinguished to the ones which were for his benefit. We may, however, hasten to add that from the said amount of income, the statutory amount of tax payable thereupon must be deducted. {Para 19}

It has also been stated: ' "Income" signifies "what comes in" (per Selborne, C., Jones v. Ogle [(1861-73) All ER Rep 918]). "It is as large a word as can be used" to denote a person's receipts (per Jessel, M.R., Huggins, ex p., Re [51 LJ Ch 935]). Income is not confined to receipts from business only and means periodical receipts from one's work, lands, investments, etc. Secy. to the Board of Revenue, Income Tax v. Al. Ar. Rm. Arunachalam Chettiar & Bros. [  MANU/TN/0126/1920 : AIR 1921 Mad 427] Ref. Vulcan Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Corporation of Madras [AIR 1930 Mad 626 (2)].

21. If the dictionary meaning of the word 'income' is taken to its logical conclusion, it should include those benefits, either in terms of money or otherwise, which are taken into consideration for the purpose of payment of income tax or professional tax although some elements thereof may or may not be taxable or would have been otherwise taxable but for the exemption conferred thereupon under the statute.

To the same effect is the decision of this Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Ram Prasad Varma and Ors. [  MANU/SC/0030/2009 : 2009:INSC:24 : (2009) 2 SCC 712: (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 853: (2009) 1 Scale 598].

7. We, therefore, are of the opinion that "dearness allowance" and "house rent allowance" payable to the deceased should have been included for determining the income of the deceased and consequently the amount of compensation.

9. Recently in a judgment dated 11th July, 2024 in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Nalini and Ors. [Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 4230/2019], this Court held that, allowances under the heads of transport allowance, house rent allowance, provident fund loan, provident fund and special allowance ought to be added while considering the basic salary of the victim/deceased to arrive at the dependency factor.

10. Therefore, components of house rent allowance, flexible benefit plan and company contribution to provident fund have to be included in the salary of the deceased while applying the component of rise in income by future prospects to determine the dependency factor. The Accident Claims Tribunal was justified in factoring these components into the salary of the deceased, before applying 50% rise by future prospects due to future prospects, while calculating the total compensation payable to the Appellant.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. ... of 2024 .

Decided On: 23.07.2024

Meenakshi Vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Citation: MANU/SC/0830/2024,2024 INSC 573.

Print Page

Whether govt servants are entitled to get house rent allowance even though they are not staying at headquarter/place of duty?

 In that view of the matter, we hold and declare
that, as long as, the said Government Resolution is intact
and the conditions to stay at the place of duty is dispensed
with, in favour of the employees working in the rural areas
under the establishment of Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, in
view of the clause 4 of the said Government Resolution the
said   protection   cannot   be   taken   away   by   the   impugned
circulars and communications. In that view of the matter,
the   members   of   the   petitioner   association   and   all   other
similarly   situated   employees   covered   by   aforementioned
Government   Resolution   dated   5th  February,   1990,
throughout the State of Maharashtra, who are working in
rural areas are entitled for house rent even though they are
not staying at headquarter/place of duty. Therefore, that
part   of   the   circular   dated   5th  July,   2008   and   the
communication   dated   14th  March,   2014   and   6th  March,
2014, i.e.   employees who are not residing at the place of
headquarter,   their   house   rent   should   be   stopped,   stand
quashed   and   set   aside.   The   employees   in   rural   areas
working under the control and supervision of Respondent
Nos. 2 to 5 throughout the State of Maharashtra, covered by
clause 4 of the aforesaid Government Resolution dated 5th
February, 1990, who are entitled for house rent, their house
rent cannot be stopped on the ground that, they are not
residing at headquarters relying upon impugned circulars
and   communications. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5822 OF 2014
Maharashtra Rajya Prathamik Shikshak Sangh, Jalgaon 

V
The State of Maharashtra 

CORAM :     S.S. SHINDE & 
     A. M. BADAR, JJ.

PRONOUNCED ON : 19th October, 2015

Print Page

Whether government servant who are not residing at place of duty are entitled to House rent allowance?

 In that view of the matter, we hold and declare
that, as long as, the said Government Resolution is intact
and the conditions to stay at the place of duty is dispensed
with, in favour of the employees working in the rural areas
under the establishment of Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, in
view of the clause 4 of the said Government Resolution the
said   protection   cannot   be   taken   away   by   the   impugned
circulars and communications. In that view of the matter,
the   members   of   the   petitioner   association   and   all   other
similarly   situated   employees   covered   by   aforementioned
Government   Resolution   dated   5th  February,   1990,
throughout the State of Maharashtra, who are working in
rural areas are entitled for house rent even though they are

not staying at headquarter/place of duty. Therefore, that
part   of   the   circular   dated   5th  July,   2008   and   the
communication   dated   14th  March,   2014   and   6th  March,
2014, i.e.   employees who are not residing at the place of
headquarter,   their   house   rent   should   be   stopped,   stand
quashed   and   set   aside.   The   employees   in   rural   areas
working under the control and supervision of Respondent
Nos. 2 to 5 throughout the State of Maharashtra, covered by
clause 4 of the aforesaid Government Resolution dated 5th
February, 1990, who are entitled for house rent, their house
rent cannot be stopped on the ground that, they are not
residing at headquarters relying upon impugned circulars
and   communications. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5822 OF 2014
Maharashtra Rajya Prathamik 
Shikshak Sangh, Jalgaon 

­V
The State of Maharashtra 

CORAM :     S.S. SHINDE & 
     A. M. BADAR, JJ.

PRONOUNCED ON : 19th October, 2015

Print Page