SC: Mens Rea As Intent Not Required In Medical Negligence Cases
The name of the case was Prabhat Kumar Singh V. State of Bihar. The decision was given by Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. The Supreme Court has held that mens rea as intent is not required in a case of medical negligence. The complainant had filed a case of medical negligence under Sections 304, 316/34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the appeal, it was held that the order of the High Court is erroneous. Hence, the orders of the High Court and the Trial Court were both set aside.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court Issues Notice To State To Consider Further Investigation By Independent Agency
In a bail hearing, the Supreme Court has held that the case needs further investigation which would be carried out by an independent investigating agency. The decision was given by a Bench comprising of Justice Surya Kant and Chief Justice of India N V Ramana. As per the reasoning given by the Bench, the investigation appeared to be motivated and hence, issued a notice to the State of Rajasthan.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court States That Pranay Sethi Judgement Doesn't Limit Operation Of Statute Providing Greater Benefits
The case was of New India Assurance Co. LTD V. Urmila Shukla. The decision was given by Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Ajay Rastogi. It was held by the Court that the judgement in Pranay Sethi does not limit operation of a statutory provision granting greater benefits in the matter of Motor Accident Compensation. The judgement given in the Pranay Sethi case was a standpoint for arriving at a just compensation with respect to Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The appeal was dismissed.
What do you think about this case?
SC: Condition Of Pre-deposit Of Fine Amount Cannot Be Imposed To Hear Revision Petition Filed By Convict
The case was of R Kalai Selvi V. Bheemappa. The decision was given by the Bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Vineet Saran. It was held by the Court that deposit of fine amount cannot be made a condition precedent for hearing revision petition under Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In this case, the accused was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The order of the High Court was set aside.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Whether Children From Second Marriage Entitled To Share In Ancestral Property
The case was of Suman Bai V. Gangabai Tryambakrao Katre. The case was being heard by Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Sankay Kishan Kaul. The question of law in consideration was whether children born from a second marriage would be entitled to a share in the ancestral property. The petitioner had approached the Apex Court challenging a High Court observation that the children should not inherit a share in the property of their grandmother since they were born from the second marriage.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court To Examine If Railways Should Compensate Passengers
The case was of Union of India V. Ramesh Chandra & Ors. The petitioners were represented by Advocates Anmol Chauhan, Shashank Bajpai, Sughosh Subramanyam, Swarupama Chaturvedi, Amrish Kumar and Ram Bahadur. The decision was given by Justice K M Joseph and Justice Ravindra Bhat. In the present case, a complaint was filed by the respondents before the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Allahabad against the Indian Railways claiming a compensation of Rs.9 lakhs for mental loss, harassment, agony, loss in relationship with in-laws, mainly due to their train being late by 6 hours, resulting in missing of a flight.
What do you think about this case?
Delhi High Court States That Applications To Amend Admissions Can Be Entertained Even After Judgement Is Reserved Under Order XII Rule 6
The case was of M/S BDR Developers Pvt Ltd V. Narsingh Shah. The decision was given by Justice Asha Menon. The Delhi High Court has observed that a Court is permitted to entertain an application to amend an admission made in pleadings even after reserving judgement on the basis of admission under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC. The petition was dismissed accordingly.
What do you think about this case?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
