[MACT] Salary Of Son Appointed On Compassionate Grounds Can't Be Taken As Salary Of Deceased For Determining Compensation: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court has held that the salary of a son who has been appointed on compassionate grounds after father's demise in a road accident cannot be taken as salary of the deceased for determining compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.Claimants' husband/ father was getting off from a bus when his leg got stuck. The bus started without noticing that his leg was stuck and as...
The Allahabad High Court has held that the salary of a son who has been appointed on compassionate grounds after father's demise in a road accident cannot be taken as salary of the deceased for determining compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Claimants' husband/ father was getting off from a bus when his leg got stuck. The bus started without noticing that his leg was stuck and as a result, he was seriously injured and was declared dead at the hospital.
In claim proceedings initiated by the legal heirs of the deceased, the Corporation denied the incident by stating that the said bus did not operate on the route where the accident happened. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.12,85,000/- in favour of the claimants along with interest @ 6% per annum. This award was challenged by both the claimants and UPSRTC before the High Court.
Counsel for UPSRTC contended that the bus by which accident was alleged to have taken place did not ply on that route. It also argued that no valid passenger ticket was recovered from the deceased and that the bus driver's testimony where he did not mention the accident was not discarded by the Tribunal.
Claimants pleaded that the compensation ought to be enhanced as the Tribunal had erroneously discarded the last salary slip of the deceased which showed his income as Rs.54,143/- and instead taken the salary of the son which is Rs. 20,000/- as the salary of deceased for calculating compensation.
The Court observed that the Tribunal had recorded an extensive finding regarding the accident and the same was based on the statement of the driver and a witness. It further held that the no ground regarding ticket not being found on deceased was taken by the Corporation either before the tribunal or the Court.
Regarding the statement of the driver, the Court held that though the driver may not have specifically mentioned the accident in his statement, his name was mentioned in the chargesheet filed by the police regarding the accident which showed his involvement in the accident.
Dismissing the First Appeal From Order filed by the Corporation, the Court moved on the enhancement of compensation.
The Court observed that the deceased worked as a junior engineer in the U.P. Power Corporation and his last salary slip was of Rs.54,143/- . Holding that the salary slip could not be proved, the Tribunal had calculated the compensation based on the salary slip of the son of the deceased who earned Rs. 20,000/- only as he had been appointed on compassionate grounds.
Justice Abdul Moin held
“The analogy adopted by the learned Tribunal in order to arrive at the salary of the deceased is not found to be legally sustainable in any view of the matter inasmuch as the deceased, who was aged about 54 years, was at the fag end of his service while his son has only been appointed on account of the death of Shri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava (deceased) and was an infant in the service and by no stretch of imagination could the salary of a young employee, the son of the deceased, would be comparable with the salary of an officer who was at the fag end of his service.”
Accordingly, the Court remitted the case back to the Tribunal to decide the compensation in accordance with law.
Case Title: Uttar Pradesh State Rd. Transport Corp. Faizabad v. Smt. Meena Srivastava And Ors 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 145 [FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 602 of 2011]
Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 145