Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.24 seconds)

Chanderi Devi & Anr vs Jaspal Singh & Ors on 31 March, 2015

27. Mr. Joshi further relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Chanderi Devi and Anr. v. Jaspal Singh and Ors .1 According to him, in the absence of proof of the vocation or income of the deceased, Mrs. Sawlani, she, being a housewife, could only be assigned a notional income of Rs. 3,000/- per month. Therefore, the quantification of compensation ought to be based on that amount. Similarly, the rate of interest granted by the MACT at 9% per annum should instead have been 7.5% per annum from the date of the judgment of the MACT, considering the prevailing banking trends.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 50 - V G Gowda - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi on 31 October, 2017

80. The funeral expenses and loss of estate are to be computed at Rs.15,000/- to be enhanced @ 10% for every three years in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) which has been duly followed in a subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in V. Pathmavati & Ors. Vs. Bharati Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. 9 The determination of funeral expenses at Rs.5,000/- by MACT is erroneous in light of the clear mandate of such Supreme Court decision.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 9815 - D Misra - Full Document

Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr on 15 April, 2009

79. The deduction towards personal expenses ought to be taken on the basis of 1/3rd of the income of late Mrs. Kavita Sawlani. This is in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (supra). The MACT in our view erred in working out the dependency at Rs.46,00,000/-, which cannot be accepted in the given facts and circumstances and considering the said judgment of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 20141 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1   2 Next