The Supreme Court has asked the insurance regulator IRDAI to place on record data on how many life-insurance policies have been issued by public and private insurers to cover persons with autism, cerebral palsy, intellectual disabilities and multiple disabilities. Hearing the Action for Autism PIL, the Court also directed the Centre to file the Ministry of Civil Aviation’s response on air-travel concerns, and listed the matter for November.
Asked to direct a High Court to dispose of a pending quashing petition within four weeks, the Supreme Court declined, with Justice BV Nagarathna observing that it does not like to set disposal dates even for district judges, because every judge has a docket to comply with each day. Recalling her own years on a High Court bench and how such orders felt then, she said the Court would not replicate that pressure. The petitioner was given liberty to seek an earlier date himself.
“People in Chennai should not alienate Delhi and vice versa,” the Supreme Court observed, invoking cooperative federalism as it urged Tamil Nadu to reconsider its opposition to Navodaya schools, while directing the State to identify land and to resolve its language-policy differences with the Centre through dialogue. New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed the […]
Weeks after a written order fixed a Rs 35 lakh divorce settlement as full and final, a petitioner-wife tried to reopen it before the Supreme Court, prompting Justice B.V. Nagarathna to draw a firm line, shield the young lawyer the litigant had turned on, and deliver the instantly-viral line: “We don’t lose our cool because […]
Justice B.V. Nagarathna questioned why an advocate’s past professional income should affect eligibility for appointment as a civil judge during a Supreme Court hearing on Tamil Nadu Judicial Service recruitment. Remarking, “Please tell me, which advocate discloses the true income in his income tax returns?” she drew laughter from lawyers in the courtroom.
The Supreme Court criticised authorities over delays in a child adoption application, calling the issue bureaucratic red tape. A Bench led by Justice BV Nagarathna questioned CARA’s rejection of the maternal aunt’s plea, observing that a family member seeking adoption should not face unnecessary hurdles.
The Supreme Court allowed a petitioner to approach the Calcutta High Court over allegations that names excluded from West Bengal’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls were being removed from ration lists. The Bench permitted withdrawal of the petition and granted liberty for further legal action.
The Supreme Court refused to interfere with convictions in a Chhattisgarh dowry death case, strongly criticising dowry harassment and humiliation of brides, while Justice BV Nagarathna emphasised that courts must send a strong societal message against financial coercion and mistreatment in matrimonial homes.