Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Jharkhand High Court, in a petition concerning welfare measures for practising advocates, observed that State resolutions and budgetary allocations for health insurance were already in place, and held that the reliefs prayed for stood substantially worked out.
“After accepting the policy, and availing the premium year after year, the insurer cannot later repudiate the claim on the ground of some ambiguity. In such cases, the principles of estoppel come into picture, which prevents the insurer from taking advantage of its own failure in disclosing the entire aspect with respect to the coverage of insurance.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“Though the Act does not ban donation of kidney in favour of a person who is not a near relative and the only restriction is that transplantation can be done only after prior approval by the State Authorisation Committee, yet the transplant surgeons are hesitant to carry out kidney transplants between unrelated persons.”
On 27-3-2023, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (‘IRDAI’) notified the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Expenses of
Gauhati High Court: The Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia, CJ. and Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., took up a PIL wherein the counsel
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J. told Delhi government to exempt the employees dealing with medical and health insurance services from
Delhi High Court: While deciding the issue that whether persons having genetic disorders can be discriminated against in the context of health