“The principle of equal pay for equal work cannot be invoked or applied invariably in every kind of service and certainly it cannot be invoked in the area of professional services when these are to be compensated”
In a medical negligence case, the Tis Hazari Court held that since there was no justifiable reason to assume that the doctor committed any offence into the allegations made by the complainant, no FIR could be registered on the whims and fancies of the complainant guided by unfounded and unsubstantiated assumptions only to satisfy his discontentment with the treatment of his child.
Human life is most precious; therefore, it is extremely difficult to decide on the quantum of compensation in medical negligence cases, it is highly subjective in nature.
Kerala High Court: In a case concerning attacks against doctors and medical institutions, Bechu Kurian Thomas, J., held that granting
Chhattisgarh High Court: Sam Koshy P, J., allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders imposing a moratorium on the establishment of
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): The Coram of Dr S.M. Kantikar (Presiding Member) and Binoy Kumar (Member) while allowing an application
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Sujoy Paul and Arun Kumar Sharma, JJ., held that the Demonstrators and Tutors
Orissa High Court: A Division Bench of S. Muralidhar, CJ and A. K Mohapatra, J., issued directions regarding Doctors being attached to
Bombay High Court: Holding that mere repeal of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the 2019 Act, without anything more, would not
Kerala High Court: P.B.Suresh Kumar, J., held that the requirement for Medical students who had studied abroad to undergo CRRI for obtaining
Kerala High Court: Finding it shocking and unbelievable that were 278 attacks against Doctors, Nurses and Healthcare Workers in the State of
Gauhati High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Sudhanshu Dhulia, CJ, and Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., directed to connect CCTV cameras of
Delhi High Court: V. Kameswar Rao, J., had set aside the controversial order of the CCIM (Central Council of Indian Medicine), whereby,
Kerala High Court: K.Haripal, J., granted bail to the Police Officer accused of manhandling a doctor and subjecting him to violence. The
Patna High Court: Ashutosh Kumar, J., directed the Bihar government to consider representation made by the petitioners for appointment in the State
Gauhati High Court: The Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia, CJ., and Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., addressed the issue of violence against doctors.
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Mohammad Rafiq, CJ. and Sujoy Paul, J., decided on a petition which was filed
National Human Rights Commission, India, after taking cognizance of a complaint about the brutal assault on a doctor by the relatives of
Bombay High Court: Addressing the matter of dysfunctional ventilators supplied through PM Cares Fund, the Division Bench of Ravindra V. Ghuge and
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Ravindra V. Ghughe and B. U. Debadwar, addressed the issue relating to supply of