Tuesday, Jan 18, 2005
Tuesday, Jan 18, 2005 |
| Tamil Nadu | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Tamil Nadu
-
Madurai
By Our Staff Reporter
MADURAI, JAN. 17. Lawyers must keep themselves abreast of the latest judgements of the Supreme Court and High Courts to enhance their performance, said A.L. Somayaji, Additional Advocate General of Tamil Nadu. He asked the lawyers to get together at least once a week and discuss the recent rulings so that they do not miss significant judgements involving intricate questions of law. Mr. Somayaji was delivering a lecture on `Interesting judgements of the Supreme Court and High Courts' in the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court here today as part of the orientation programme conducted for lawyers. K. Ravirajapandian, judge, shared the dais. The programme was jointly organised by the Bench and the Madras High Court Madurai Bench Advocates Association. Pointing out that lawyers will learn a lot upon going through the orders of the court, Mr. Somayaji referred to a judgement delivered by the Kerala High Court on January 19, 2001, and said, "Until I read this judgement, I did not know that such a provision of law existed in the Civil Procedure Code. According to the ruling, when two judges differ on certain issues and do not refer it to a third judge, the judgement of the trial court is confirmed by virtue of section 98 (2) of CPC, whereas, all along I was of the impression that when two judges differ, the matter must be referred to a third judge." He also read out a judgement of the apex court, reported in (2004) 6 Supreme Court Cases where the court had ruled that criminal liability could not be fixed on a doctor or a surgeon for the death of a patient unless the standard of negligence required to be proved was so high to be described as "gross negligence" or "recklessness." Observing that fixing responsibilities on hospitals and doctors for everything that goes wrong would lead to shaking mutual confidence between patients and doctors since the latter would be more worried about their safety than giving the best treatment to the patients, the court ruled "Every mishap or misfortune in the hospital or clinic of a doctor is not a gross act of negligence to try him for an offence of culpable negligence." Earlier V. Periyakaruppiah, Registrar (Judicial) of the Bench, introduced Mr. Somayaji to the gathering. Registrar (Administration) S. Palanivelu was present.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
