LAKSHMI ANIL SALGAOCAR suing as the Administratrix of the ESTATE OF ANIL VASSUDEVA SALGAOCAR deceased v PURNIMA ANIL SALGAOCAR

[2023] SGHC 290 High Court (General Division) 13 October 2023 HC/OC 49/2022

3 cases cited

Outcome

Claim dismissed

“For the foregoing reasons, I dismiss OC 49.”

Source: [2023] SGHC 290, High Court (General Division), decided 13 October 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	13 October 2023
Judge	Philip Jeyaretnam
Charges / claim	Contract
Outcome	Claim dismissed
Counsel	Drew & Napier LLC, Niru & Co LLC, Estad Amber Joy, Kanapathi Pillai Nirumalan, Liew Teck Huat, Lim Gerui, Phang Cunkuang

Source: [2023] SGHC 290, High Court (General Division), decided 13 October 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Contract — Breach — Breach of settlement agreement

Practice Areas

Contract

Judges (1)

Philip Jeyaretnam Delivered

Counsel (7)

Drew & Napier LLC Firm Niru & Co LLC Firm Estad Amber Joy Counsel for the defendant Kanapathi Pillai Nirumalan Counsel for the plaintiff Liew Teck Huat Counsel for the plaintiff Lim Gerui Counsel for the defendant Phang Cunkuang Counsel for the plaintiff

Parties (2)

Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar Plaintiff Purnima Anil Salgaocar Defendant

Case Significance

Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar (suing as the administratrix of the estate of Anil Vassudeva Salgaocar, deceased) v Purnima Anil Salgaocar [2023] SGHC 290 is a reserved judgment of Philip Jeyaretnam J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 13 October 2023 in Originating Claim No 49 of 2022. The case arises from a long-running dispute between Mdm Lakshmi, a widow and mother, and her daughter Ms Purnima, over the estate of the late patriarch Mr Anil Vassudeva Salgaocar, principally concerning the accounting for the Estate's assets. The specific question was whether, under the terms of a settlement agreement, Ms Purnima was precluded from pursuing an administration action for an account of the estate, which in turn depended on whether Mdm Lakshmi had provided accounts of certain assets in accordance with that agreement.

Summary

In this General Division of the High Court matter, Mdm Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar, administratrix of her late husband's estate, brought Originating Claim 49 of 2022 against her daughter, Ms Purnima Anil Salgaocar, arising from a long-running dispute over the estate's assets. The issue was whether, under a settlement agreement, Ms Purnima was precluded from pursuing an administration action for an account, which turned on whether Mdm Lakshmi had provided a compliant account of the Non-India Assets. The court held the account was not sufficient and dismissed the claim.

What was Lakshmi Anil Salgaocar v Purnima Anil Salgaocar [2023] SGHC 290 about?

It was a dispute before Philip Jeyaretnam J between a widow, Mdm Lakshmi, and her daughter Ms Purnima over the estate of the late Mr Anil Vassudeva Salgaocar, turning on a settlement agreement, decided on 13 October 2023.

What was the key issue in [2023] SGHC 290?

The court considered whether, under a settlement agreement, Ms Purnima was precluded from pursuing an administration action for an account of the estate, which depended on whether Mdm Lakshmi had provided accounts of certain assets as that agreement required.