Dependency Deduction - Judgment Search Results

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johal

Court: Supreme Court of India

President in January 1996 whereby, his annual salary would have been enhanced to Rs. 3,50,000/-. While asserting their dependency on the deceased, the claimants i.e., the parents, wife and children of the deceased claimed compensation against the … computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component. 59.5. For determination of the multiplicand, the deduction for personal and living expenses, the tribunals and the courts shall be guided by paras 30 to 32

Umadevi and ors. Vs. Chandrashekharaiah and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2012(1)KCCR138

p.m. in the absent of acceptable evidence regarding his avocation and income and further while calculating loss of dependency the Tribunal has taken only 1/3rd of the notional income of the deceased towards loss of dependency to … to be taken in case of death of persons aged between 41-45 years was 14 and that the deductions that is required to be calculated in cases where there are four dependents, deduction should be th and

M/S. the United India Insurance Vs. Smt. Lalita Devi and ors

Court: Delhi

applied the multiplier of 14 as per the age of the deceased's mother to compute the loss of dependency, deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses as `8,12,448/-, added `1 lakh towards loss of love and affection … the multiplier of 14 as per the age of the deceased's mother to compute the loss of dependency, deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses as `8,12,448/-, added `1 lakh towards loss of love and affection and

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sunita Bai and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2006ACJ311

the Tribunal has erred in assessing monthly income of the deceased and, therefore, drawn wrong conclusion regarding the dependency thereto and the awarded amount need to be modified since the correct multiplier has also not been adopted … of 1999 the main assail to the award is that the sum awarded is quite meagre and the deduction of Rs. 396 or Rs. 400 for 6 days of unpaid leave for each month and deduction of

Vimal Kanwar and Others Vs. Kishore Dan and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

and the amount of pension received by Smt. Vimal Kanwar due to death of deceased. Similarly, while assessing dependency deduction for GPF and State Insurance, addition of Rs.4,500/- in monthly income and multiplier of 15 etc. is not

Vimal Kanwar and ors. Vs. Kishore Dan and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

and the amount of pension received by Smt. Vimal Kanwar due to death of deceased. Similarly, while assessing dependency deduction for GPF and State Insurance, addition of Rs.4,500/- in monthly income and multiplier of 15 etc. is not

The Divisional Manager vs Panchalingappa S/O Basappa Betageri

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

heads in each of these cases. MVC Nos. Loss of Loss of Loss of Funeral Loss of Transpor dependency consortium estate expense love and tation of [Rs.] [Rs.] [Rs.] [Rs.] affection dead [Rs.] body[Rs.]4. Sri. G.N. Raichur, … [b] it has not deducted any amount towards Income Tax, and [c] it has not, subject to standard deduction, deducted 10% of the income above the standard deduction towards income tax. Sri. G.N. Raichur also canvasses that

Aniamma vs Reju Joy

Court: Kerala

Revised Annual income Rs.14,31,837 for calculation of loss of (Rs.12,45,076+Rs.1,86,761) dependency Calculation of loss Multiplier applicable 11 of dependency Deduction towards personal expenses 14,31,837x11x2/3 Rs.1,05,00,138/-12. As far as funeral expenses is concerned, theTribunal awarded Rs.25,000/-. In National Insurance

The Divisional Manager vs Smt. Rukmavva W/O. Shrishail Kamble

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

has awarded compensation under the various heads as follows: Sl. Heads. Amount in No. (Rs.)1. Towards loss of dependency. 22,23,000/-2. Towards funeral expenses. 15,000/-3. Towards loss of estate. 15,000/-4. Towards parental consortium. 1,20,000/-5. Towards spousal consortium. 40,000/-6. … son i.e., respondent No.2 -5- and one among the daughters is married woman i.e., respondent No.3 herein. Therefore, deduction of 1/5th income towards personal and living expenses is not correct and that ought to have been 1/4th.

Sri Shivanand S/O Basavaraj Korishettar vs Sohan S/O Sudhakar Kabadi

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

heads in each of these cases. MVC Nos. Loss of Loss of Loss of Funeral Loss of Transpor dependency consortium estate expense love and tation of [Rs.] [Rs.] [Rs.] [Rs.] affection dead [Rs.] body[Rs.]4. Sri. G.N. Raichur, … [b] it has not deducted any amount towards Income Tax, and [c] it has not, subject to standard deduction, deducted 10% of the income above the standard deduction towards income tax. Sri. G.N. Raichur also canvasses that