Legal Reference Library

In Dr. Subhas Chandra Das vs State of Orissa, the Orissa High Court has, in a medical negligence case, observed that it is the duty of a doctor to explain his patient or relatives chances of success and the risk of failure of the suggested treatment and inform them about the foreseeable risks and possible negative effects of the treatment, keeping in mind the patient’s specific condition. Justice SK Sahoo, though quashed an order taking cognizance against a doctor under Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code, directed prosecution under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, observing that there were sufficient materials to proceed against the doctor under the Section 304-A, as his patient died due to his rash or negligent acts. The case pertains to the death of a pregnant lady as well as the baby in the unborn condition. The doctor was accused of being negligent. The high court observed that, though knowledge cannot be attributed to the doctor, he did such a high degree of...

The Supreme Court, in Senathi Na. Venkitasalapathi Ayyer & Sons Private Trust vs. Indhumathi, has observed that mere description or the name of a trust could not be taken as determinative of the character of the trust without examining the nature of the trust. A bench comprising Justice AK Goel and Justice UU Lalit made this observation while setting aside a Madras High Court judgment, which had held a trust named Senathi Na. Venkitasalapathi Ayyer & Sons Private Trust as a private trust. The Madras High Court judgment, which had held a trust named Senathi Na. Venkitasalapathi Ayyer & Sons Private Trust as a private trust. The Madras High Court had allowed a civil revision petition preferred by tenants who had contended that exemption from the Rent Act in favour of public trusts was not applicable since the trust is ‘private’. A building owned by a public trust is exempted under Section 29 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. If the trust in q...

In COUNCIL OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA VS DEEPAK GUPTA, the Supreme Court has opined that if a practicing chartered accountant commits misconduct while he holds the certificate of practice issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, he would be liable for punishment if the misconduct is proved.... Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/proved-misconduct-chartered-accountant-holds-certificate-practice-punishable-sc-read-order/

It is undisputed position before us that the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act which was handed over to the post office on 30th November, 2007 was incorrectly addressed i.e. it was addressed to the assessee’s old office at Nariman Point, Mumbai. In terms of Section 282 of the Act as existing in 2007 a notice may be served on the person named therein either by post or as if it were a summons issued by the Court under the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 27 of the General Clauses Act provides that where any Central Act requires a document to be served by post where the expression “serve” or “given” or “sent” shall be deemed to have been effected by properly addressing, prepaying and posting. In such cases, unless the contrary is proved which would be deemed to have been served at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post to the addressee. In this case admittedly the envelope containing the notice was wrongly addressed. Thus the presumption under Sect...

In Sk. Bhikan S/o Sk. Noor Mohd. Vs Mehamoodabee w/o Sk. Afzal & Ors, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that when the Court is called upon to interpret the documents and examine its effect, it involves questions of law. It is, therefore, obligatory upon the High Court to decide such questions on merits. In this case, the High Court could do so after framing substantial questions of law as required under Section 100 of the Code. It was, however, not done.

In Rajesh Kumar V. National Insurance Company Limited and Ors, revision petition has been filed before NCDRC against the impugned order passed by Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Appeal No. 1192/2014, vide which, order passed by District Forum Kurukshetra, partly allowing complaint No. 24/2013, filed by present Petitioner, was set aside. State Commission held that there was fundamental breach of terms and conditions of policy on part of complainant, as vehicle was being used as a taxi. Perusal of reply filed by OP Insurance Company before District Forum and orders passed by State Commission as well as District Forum reveals that after alleged incident, an FIR was registered by father of the Complainant before the local police, in which it was stated that three persons came to Complainant, when he was standing at the taxi stand. He settled a fare of Rs. 700/- with them for taking them to Ambala Cantt. However, when they were on their way, occupants of the ca...

In Secretary/Manager, Mayyanad Regional Co-Operative Bank v. Ebrahimkutty, appeal has been filed against the impugned order passed by Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide which, Consumer Complaint No. C-05/13, filed by present Respondent, was allowed and Appellant/opposite party (OP) was directed to return the original sale deed number 1959/92 to complainant within one month, failing which to provide compensation of 10 lakh with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. In facts of case, complainant/respondent availed a loan from Appellant, by mortgaging his property. Complainant repaid his loan, but OP Bank did not return the original title deed. It has been stated that the Bank orally informed him in the year 1999 that the original deed was missing, and the OP Bank was on search to recover the same. Complainant stated that, property was valued at about Rs. 75 lakhs and due to lack of original document, complainant was unable to sell pro...