Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)

Keith Rowe vs Prashant Sagar & Ors. on 15 January, 2010

15. Further, as per the Keith Rowe Vs. Prashant Sagar & ors. MAC appeal no.601 of 2007 decided on 15.01.2010 judgement where the claimants are non- dependent spouse/childeren/ parents claiming on behalf of the estate, the saving can be taken 1/4th where the non-dependents are having independent establishments. PW1/ petitioner no. 1 in his cross examination stated that he is running a shop of surgical items under the name and style M/s M.M. Scientific and the owner of the said firm is his younger brother (petitioner no. 2). He has further stated that the firm which was being run by his deceased father is not in operation / closed. This shows that both the petitioners being the sons of the victim are having independent establishment / business which is different from that of their father / victim. Deduction is taken accordingly as 1/4th.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 187 - J R Midha - Full Document
1