Amendment Of Pleadings
Interlocutory Application can be filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code,1908 (CPC, 1908) to amend or alter the pleadings at any stage of the case proceedings. The amendment or alteration should be directly related to the subject material of the dispute between the parties if it does not cause injustice to the other side. The Court will notify the opposite party before allowing the application for amendment. The Court will not entertain applications filed after the commencement of trial. According to Order 6 Rule 18 of CPC, 1908, the amendment should be made within fourteen days of receiving the order to amend or alter the pleadings; after that, it is the discretion of the court to allow the amendment. The Supreme Court laid down the guidelines to be followed regarding the amendment of pleadings in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) vs Sanjeev Builders Pvt. Ltd, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 22443 of 2019). The primary issue in this case was that the Supreme Court challenged the amendment application allowed by the lower court because the relief was barred by limitation. The Supreme Court held that the mere delay in application should not be a bar to seeking relief under Order 6 Rule 17. The prayer for amendment is to be allowed: (i) If the amendment is required for effective and proper adjudication of the controversy between the parties and (ii) to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, provided (a) the amendment does not result in injustice to the other side, (b) by the amendment, the parties seeking amendment do not seek to withdraw any clear admission made by the party, which confers a right on the other side and (c) the amendment does not raise a time-barred claim, resulting in the divesting of the other side of a valuable accrued right (in certain situations). (d) A prayer for amendment is generally required to be allowed unless: (i) By the amendment, a time-barred claim is sought to be introduced, in which case the fact that the claim would be time-barred becomes a relevant factor for consideration, (ii) the amendment changes the nature of the suit, (iii) the prayer for amendment is malafide, or (iv) the other side loses a valid defence by the amendment. (v) When dealing with a prayer for amendment of pleadings, the court should avoid a hyper-technical approach, which is ordinarily required to be liberal, especially where costs can compensate the opposite party. (vi) Where the amendment would enable the court to consider the dispute more precisely and would aid in rendering a more satisfactory decision, the prayer for amendment should be allowed. (vii) Where the amendment merely seeks to introduce an additional or new approach without introducing a time-barred cause of action, it is liable to be allowed even after the expiry of the limitation. (viii) Amendment may be justifiably allowed where it is intended to rectify the absence of material particulars in the plaint. (ix) A delay in applying for an amendment alone is not grounds for disallowing the prayer. Where the aspect of delay is arguable, the prayer for amendment could be allowed, and the issue of limitation could be framed separately for the decision. (x) Where the amendment changes the nature of the suit or the cause of action to establish an entirely new case foreign to the case established in the plaint, the amendment must be disallowed. However, the amendment sought only concerns the relief in the plaint and is predicated on facts already pleaded. Ordinarily, the amendment is required to be allowed. (xi) Where the amendment is sought before the commencement of trial, the court must be liberal in its approach. The court must remember that the opposite party would have a chance to meet the case set up in the amendment. As such, where the amendment does not result in irreparable prejudice to the opposite party or divest the opposite party of an advantage it had secured due to an admission by the party seeking amendment, the amendment must be allowed. Equally, where the amendment is necessary for the court to effectively adjudicate the main issues in controversy between the parties, the amendment should be allowed. (See Vijay Gupta v. Gagninder Kr. Gandhi & Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1897) Done By: Sowmiya R.K , B.A.,LL.B(Hons), LLM (Business Law), Junior Legal Consultant
International Maritime Law
INTRODUCTION A larger subset of international law is international maritime law. It revolves on everything pertaining to the oceans and seas. International maritime law specifically regulates ships, persons employed by or on behalf of the ship, and marine resources, such as fish and other marine life as well as oil and natural gas that are found in the seas and oceans. Different concepts under maritime law 1. Ship registration The process that establishes a ship’s nationality documents is called ship registration. A ship’s nationality is established and additional shipping regulations are enforced through registration. It gives a state the legal authority to safeguard a particular ship by associating it with that state. Once a ship’s nationality has been officially recognised, it can sail wherever in the world that its home country’s residents desire. Each ship requires to be registered in a specific country. A ship follows the regulations of the nation in which it is registered. 2. Flag state The nation where the ship is registered is known as a “flag state”. The ship’s flag state has total regulatory authority over it. Additionally, the flag state must certify the ships and their crew members and conduct routine inspections of the vessels for nations that have signed agreements globally. Additionally, the flag state guarantees environmental conservation and safety. The entity designated as the “registry” is in charge of registering ships and certifying their compliance. The type of registry, that is if it is private, public, or a combination of the two, depends on the laws of that country. In certain instances, the government grants permission to a third party to handle ship registration. 3. Ship arrest The phrase “ship arrest” refers to the admiralty procedure of civil law, which involves obtaining an arrest warrant for the ship. A provision in maritime law allows for the stopping of a ship’s movement or trade via a ship until further orders are given by the relevant court. In order to secure a court claim, the ship or vessel is detained through the application of a judicial procedure. It is crucial to remember that this ship arrest does not grant permission to seize a ship for the purpose of carrying out or executing a court order. There are various reasons why a ship may be the subject of an arrest warrant. After following the legal process outlined by maritime law, the authority assigned to carry out this duty may make an arrest of the ship. The ship is also being investigated in connection with this warrant. A ship’s inquiry may be conducted for crimes as well as other incidents such as collisions, salvage, fatalities, injuries to persons, property loss, breaking rules on the road, health or safety laws, and the carrying out of a decree. 4. Recreational boating A ship or boat of any kind that is utilised or capable of being used for transportation is referred to as a “recreational boat.” This includes lifeboats, temporary boats, liveaboard boats, and any other kind of boat. Every year, the recreational boating industry suffers hundreds and thousands of deaths and injuries. It’s crucial that these ships are typically used for non-commercial objectives. Non-commercial boats are subject to the same regulations as commercial vessels. If these non-commercial boaters violate any maritime laws or navigation regulations, they will be subject to the penalties listed in the relevant maritime statutes. With a few exceptions classified as “seasoned maritime incidents,” these incidents are handled by maritime regulations. Comparative fault applies to the harm claim in certain situations, meaning that each party bears a portion of the blame. For instance, all of the operators and participating vessels are considered participants in collisions involving pleasure craft. But, in order to demonstrate their lack of involvement, the party must first acquire proof. Recreational boaters frequently observe errors such as failing to yield to traffic, overtaking other boats illegally, blind turns, speeding, excessive wake-throwing, docking, inadequate navigational lights, mishaps, and a lack of training. 5. Transit passage rights A vessel may move freely within a strait, allowing it to follow a smooth, continuous, and quick transit between two areas of the high seas or exclusive economic zones. This is known as transit passage in the law of the sea. This right of transit passage is subject to an exception, though, which specifies that if a strait forms between a state’s island and its mainland and there is a seaward of the island, the right of transit will not be applicable. Without adjacent notices or governmental approval, every military and commercial ship has the unrestricted right of transit passage in channels used for international navigation in the course of their regular business. Regarding surface ships and submarines, the phrase “normal mode of operation” refers to the surface ship’s ability to navigate in a way that complies with vessel security and the submarine’s ability to travel underwater. The vessel cannot be suspended by the neighbouring states for any needless cause, including military drills. Furthermore, states are not allowed to enact laws or rules that impair the freedom of transit passage. 6. Protection of the marine environment Due to the fact that pollution in marine environments has been a problem for many years, international communities have developed a number of laws and regulations to address this issue. International communities and organisations have listed a number of treaties and conventions to address the problem of the marine population. Even the United Nations Conventions, such as the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, have established standards and guidelines in the field of maritime law. It lays out the responsibilities and duties that signatory nations have to maintain and safeguard the maritime environment. One of the most significant treaties in the area of marine law is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982), which mandates that all countries endeavour to conserve the marine environment and contains provisions for environmental protection. Maritime law in India –
Doctrine Of Relation Back Under Hindu Law
Introduction The concept of adoption is the transfer of a child from his birth family to a new family, giving the infant new status, rights, and responsibilities while severing all ties to the former family. The theory of relating back, which holds that the child adopted by a widow relates back to the widow’s deceased husband and is entitled to the estate of his deceased adoptive father, was common under uncodified old Hindu law. However, the concept was abandoned after the enactment of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. What was the Doctrine of Relation Back? In order to aid in the legal monitoring of the relationships between heirs, spouses, and their legal entitlement to inherit ancestral property, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act was passed in 1956. Prior to the enactment of this legislation, there was a prevalent custom known as the Doctrine of Relation Back. According to this idea, which was developed under ancient Hindu law, a Hindu widow could adopt a son after the death of her husband. Furthermore, this son was to be regarded as the deceased husband’s legal adoptive child. The son was regarded as legally adopted from the date of the husband’s death for the sake of ease in inheritance proceedings. The most peculiar rule under this doctrine was that if the deceased’s property was vested to his brothers or other coparceners, then the adopted son would be entitled to divest such property and be considered the deceased’s posthumous son. This doctrine of considering the adopted son of a deceased individual as his posthumous son was mentioned in the case of Shrinivas Krishnarao Kango v. Narayan Devji Kango ((1955) 1 SCR). As a result, the adopted son was eligible to be considered the deceased’s legal heir and therefore be entitled to all property that the deceased owned prior to his death. In Indian society, the son is considered the only “eligible heir,” which is the main benefit of adoption. According to customary Hindu law, a male child was essential to the continuation of the family and the heirship of property. According to this custom, families who had only girls or no children at all expressed interest in adopting sons, which led to the creation of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956. Developments in Hindu Succession Laws However, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 ended the practice of relation back due to a number of court decisions and the growth of the equality concept in India. The practice became unlawful under Sections 12(b) and 12(c) of the Act, which claimed that it went against the principle that property cannot be taken away from someone after it has come into their possession. As per proviso (c) of section 12, an adopted child is not entitled to take away from anyone any property that was previously vested in them. The adopted child will inherit the belongings left by the adoptive parents, after their death. If a widow adopts a son, she cannot be discharged of any property that was vested in her before adoption. Furthermore, the division that was completed prior to this adoption is not eligible for reconsideration in order to reorganise the joint family properties. The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and its adoption provisions aim to cut off the adopted child’s biological ties once they are placed in the adoptive family’s care, as the Supreme Court noted in the case of Sitabai & Anr. v. Ramachandra (AIR1970SC343). The child is officially transferred from the biological family to the adoptive family. By giving the adopted child, the same status as a natural born child in the adoptive family as of the adoption date, the Act thereby nullifies the theory of relation back. A child’s adoption would result in the adoption family’s ties replacing all of the ones with their birth family as of the adoption date. The Madras High Court noted in the case of Ratan Singh v. Rajaram (AIRONLINE 2020 MP 655) that the individual claiming property ownership based on adoption must demonstrate the validity of the adoption by providing appropriate proof. The onus then turns on the one making the challenge to dispute the same. In this instant case, none of the individuals offering the child for adoption signed the adoption paperwork. The lower court’s judgement was overturned because the court determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the adoption’s validity. Conclusion The Supreme Court has rectified some weaknesses in the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act in certain situations. In such cases, the Supreme Court correctly declared that the widow’s adopted son was entitled to the benefits of her late spouse. A widow who adopts a son adds a member to the family, and all the rights that the son had in his birth family are now restored in the adoptive family, replacing what was lost there. As a result, the child’s relationship with the biological family is cut off, and new rights are established in the adoptive family. Done By: Nithyaparvathy R.G, B.Com LL.B (Hons.), Junior Legal ConsultantFor Origin Law Labs
Who is eligible to be a Portfolio Manager under SEBI Regulations
What is a portfolio? The SEBI (Portfolio Manager) Regulation 2020 provides the eligibility conditions for a person to be appointed a Portfolio Manager. A portfolio means the total holdings of securities belonging to any person. Simply put, it is a curated collection of assets with financial value. The portfolio may include various financial investments like stocks, bonds, liquid assets, commodities, etc. Who is a portfolio manager? They’re the ones who manage clients’ portfolios of securities, goods, or funds on their behalf. They’re like financial superheroes, advising clients on their portfolios and even dealing with goods like gold or oil. But they’re not just anyone, they must be registered under Portfolio Manager Regulations and obtain a registration certificate to function as portfolio managers. Registration of application The applicant must provide any information and clarification as SEBI requires, except in rare scenarios where the principal officers must appear personally. There is no specific time limit for the validity of a certificate of registration provided by the Board; it is valid until it is cancelled or suspended. The board also has the option to reject the application, and the decision has to be communicated to the applicant within 30 days. The board shall reject the application only after providing a proper opportunity to be heard. Principal officer The principal officer is usually an employee of the portfolio manager and is responsible for the portfolio manager’s operations and decisions regarding the administration of the client portfolio. The principal officer also maintains the book of accounts, records, and documents. Qualifications of Principal Officers The principal officer needs to have the following qualifications for the application to be considered by SEBI: Done By: Sri Sai Kamalini M.S , B.A LL.B (Hons.), LLM ( Corporate law and Financial policy),Junior Legal ConsultantFor Origin Law Labs
Marginalization of Manual Scavenging
In India, manual scavenging has been a regular debate, especially with the country’s rising population. Manual scavenging, a deeply ingrained practice within the socio-economic structure of India, serves as a poignant testament to the enduring presence of caste-based prejudice and systemic disregard. Manual scavengers persistently face maltreatment, marginalization, and stigmatisation, notwithstanding the implementation of legislative measures and social awareness campaigns. Manual scavenging can be historically linked to the caste system of ancient India, wherein specific communities were assigned mundane labour based on their lineage. In ancient times, the responsibility of cleansing human excreta and dispersing refuse was primarily ascribed to the lowest castes, with the Dalits being particularly affected. This egregious practice endured for centuries, thereby sustaining a recurring pattern of mistreatment and subjugation. Section 2 (j) of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, defines who a manual scavenger is. It says that “manual scavenger” means a person engaged in or employed for manually carrying human excreta, and the expression “manual scavenging” shall be construed accordingly. This Act prohibits the employment of Manual scavenging, which constitutes one of the gravest breaches of human rights. Additionally, it is a reprehensible treatment of human dignity, given that it constitutes the most menial labour. It preys on the most vulnerable segments of society, endangers their lives, and poses a mortal danger. The decomposition of waste generates a multitude of toxic and hazardous gases, which have the potential to induce a range of ailments, including skin disorders, respiratory complications, chronic diseases, and even fatality. Such scavenging violates the freedoms to dignity and health, as well as the rights to life and liberty. Moreover, it infringes upon the principle of equality by deeming untouchables devoid of dignity. The Act regulates the construction of unsanitary restrooms and prohibits the occupation of individuals as manual scavengers. Violating this Act may result in imprisonment for a maximum of one year, a fine of Rs. 2,000, or both. Despite this, there were no convictions during the twenty years that the Act was in effect.[1] Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act. 2013 prohibits manual cleaning of open pits and sewers. Recently, in Commissioner, BMC v Kachra Vahtuk Shramik Sangh (Civil WP 5357 of 2021)[2] the Bombay High Court stated that cleanliness is a necessity but should not be through the enslavement of a particular sect of people in the name of caste. Comprehensive rehabilitation programs and rigorous enforcement of existing laws are essential for preserving the dignity and welfare of manual scavengers. Equal protection of law and equal respect is a fundamental right for every citizen, regardless of class, caste and colour. Art 21 of the Constitution confers the right to life and dignity. Dignity is a subjective concept; there is a general understanding of it. Manual scavenging threatens the well-being and existence of those involved and reinforces intergenerational poverty and discrimination. As a result of restricted educational and alternative employment opportunities, children of manual scavengers frequently continue in the family business. Furthermore, communities and individuals are subject to the stigmatisation associated with manual scavenging, which hinders their social integration, marriage prospects, and access to fundamental services. Supporting skill development initiatives, modern sanitation infrastructure investment, and automation efforts are all viable strategies to generate alternative employment opportunities and disrupt the recurring cycle of manual scavenge. The Civil Rights Act 1955 mentions that manual scavenging is a form of untouchability. Workers have yet to be rehabilitated, primarily due to the absence of a supervisory authority specified in the Act. As per the regulations, many families of labourers who perished while engaged in manual scavenging are not compensated; in Gujarat, only 137 of 152 families were paid. Additionally, enduring social stigma and a shortage of subsequent employment opportunities contribute to the problem’s persistence. As a result of inadequate remediation and skill development opportunities, these employees are unable to achieve sustainable employment and continue to be trapped in the detrimental cycle of manual scavenging.[3] Therefore, Manual scavenging in India transcends its sanitation implications and constitutes a grave infringement upon human rights, with its origins in socio-economic inequality and caste-based prejudice. Eradicating this dehumanising practice requires coordinated efforts from government agencies, civil society organisations, and the general public. By recognising the intrinsic worth of each person and advocating for comprehensive progress, India can progress towards a forthcoming era in which manual scavenging is relegated to antiquity, and all inhabitants are regarded equally and with reverence. [1] Manual Scavenging: An Act to Empower Manual Scavengers – Getlegal India [2] Commissioner, BMC v Kachra Vahtuk Shramik Sangh (Civil WP 5357 of 2021) [3] The Menace of Manual Scavenging in India: The Case for Stronger Legal Implementation | OHRH (ox.ac.uk) Done By: Anoushka Samyuktha, B.A LL.B (Hons), LLM (Criminal Law),Junior Legal ConsultantFor Origin Law Labs
Censor Board – Reasons for changing parameters for censoring content.
What seems fair to one might be unfair to someone else. Is there a solid parameter to test the fairness of art? Especially when we look into cinema, every film is subject to various criticisms. In India, almost a thousand films are released in a year. The Central Board of Film Certification(CBFC) thoroughly scrutinises these films. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting governs CBFC. It regulates the films’ contents per the provisions under the Cinematograph Act 1952 and The Cinematographic (Certification) Rules, 1983. The main focus of the CBFC is to ensure that rational, educational and healthy entertainment content reaches the audience. The cultural and socioeconomic sensitivities are to be balanced with creative freedom by CBFC. The procedure entails a subjective assessment of the material, occasionally sparking discussions and disagreements amongst the film-makers and critics. Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act deals with the principles to be followed while certifying films. The parameters mentioned in Section 5B are that the films shall be scrutinized as anything against the interests of the sovereignty, integrity, security of the country and its foreign relations, public order, decency or morality, defamation or contempt of court. The Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee holds high significance as it mentions that the CBFC is supposed to be a certification authority and should not censor films unreasonably. Any appeal in this regard was addressed to the FCAT- Film Certification Appellate Tribunal u/s 5D of the Cinematograph Act. FCATs were recently abolished because the tribunals were not functioning at their peak, and the administration highly relied on a nodal officer. Now, the appellate authority is the respective state High Courts. It was stated by the Bombay High Court in Hiten Dhirajlal Metha v. Bhansali Production, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 372, that once the CBFC has granted a certificate to a movie, then there should not be any obstruction to release the film to the public. The Court also pointed out that there was no violation of any fundamental rights for which the Court could interfere. The film fraternity is not entirely happy about the abolishment of FCAT because of the strict and restricted inference by the Courts. Due to procedural complexities, once the case goes to court, there might be delays in the judgment, which can impact the film’s outcome. Film-makers who previously depended on the FCAT to accelerate the certification procedure are now confronted with the possibility of protracted legal disputes and setbacks in releasing their pictures. The lack of an autonomous appellate entity has the potential to intensify administrative obstacles and impede the manifestation of artistic creativity. The abolition of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal in India signifies a noteworthy advancement in the ongoing scholarly conversation surrounding censorship, artistic autonomy, and administrative oversight within the film industry. The supporters perceive it as a measure to simplify the certification procedure, while those against it express legitimate apprehensions over the weakening of oversight and the possibility of censorship. As India grapples with these intricate dynamics, achieving a harmonious equilibrium between regulatory supervision and the safeguarding of constitutional rights is crucial, thereby fostering the flourishing of artistic expression within a dynamic and democratic society. Done By: Anoushka Samyuktha, B.A LL.B (Hons), LLM (Criminal Law), Junior Legal ConsultantFor Origin Law Labs
Fact Check Unit
The Press Information Bureau (PIB) is the Indian government’s agency that disseminates official information to the media and acts as a bridge between the government and the public through media. It communicates policies and programs while also gathering public feedback. The Press Information Bureau (PIB) has been unwavering in its commitment to combatting fake news about the Indian government. In November 2019, it established a Fact Check Unit to rigorously verify claims about government policies, announcements, and measures from ministries and departments. This unit is dedicated to dispelling misinformation, rumours, and false claims, ensuring the public receives accurate information. On March 20, 2024, the Ministry of Electronics and IT announced a significant development. The Press Information Bureau’s Fact Check Unit will now serve as the Central Government’s Fact Check Unit under Section 3(1)(b)(v) of Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules 2021). This unit will be crucial in monitoring social media posts related to the Union Government’s operations, ensuring the integrity of the information shared. Social media platforms are mandated to take down any information this unit identifies as fake/false, or they risk losing their legal immunity as intermediaries under the IT Rules of 2021. In the case of Kunal Kamra v. Union of India, Civil Writ Petition (L) No. 9792 of 2023, The Petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules 2021 on the grounds of violating Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and (g), and 21 of the Constitution of India,1950 as well as Sections 79 Section 87(2)(z) and (zg) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 which states that intermediary shall not be accountable for any information of third party, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him and the guidelines to be observed by the intermediaries under Section 79(2) of the Information Technology Act,2000 respectively. The petitioners were aggrieved by the power granted to the Central Government’s Fact Check Unit (FCU) to identify fake, false, or misleading information and subsequently compel social media intermediaries to make reasonable efforts to remove or restrict access to such information on their platforms. They claimed that this rule, which empowers the FCU to determine the integrity of information, has a ‘chilling effect’ on the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. The petitioners argued that the unbridled power vested in the Central Government’s Fact Check Unit makes the government a judge in its cause, potentially resulting in the government compelling intermediaries to take down information that may be unfavourable to it. The Bombay High Court had refused to stay the implementation of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2023. Consequently, it allowed the Union Government to notify the establishment of the Fact-Check Unit (FCU). The petitioners filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court (SC), challenging the Bombay High Court’s decision. The SC has stayed the Union Government’s notification establishing the Fact-Check Unit (FCU) under the IT Amendment Rules 2023. However, the SC has also acknowledged the ‘serious constitutional questions’ raised as a challenge to these amended rules. In particular, the impact of Rule 3(1)(b)(v), as amended in 2023, on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression will be thoroughly analysed by the Bombay High Court during the hearing of this matter, keeping the public informed about the ongoing legal developments. Done By: Sowmiya R.K , B.A.,LL.B(Hons), LLM (Business Law), Junior Legal Consultant
Employees State Insurance Fund
The Employees’ State Insurance Fund, established under the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, serves the purpose of providing financial support to employees working in factories and establishments as defined in the Act, with 10 or more employees (20 or more in some states). However, only employees with monthly wages not exceeding Rs. 21,000 (Rs. 25,000 for persons with disabilities) are covered under the scheme. The Act extends coverage to various establishments such as shops, restaurants, hotels, cinema theatres, road motor transport undertakings, newspaper establishments, educational institutions, and medical institutions. Section 26 of the Act mandates that all contributions paid under the ESI Act, 1948, and any other contributions received on behalf of the Corporation shall be settled into the ESI Fund. Contributions can be in various forms, including grants, donations, and gifts from the Central or any State Government, local authority, or any individual or body, whether incorporated or not. Section 28 of the Act outlines the permissible expenses that can be derived from the Fund. These include: 1. Payment of benefits and provision of medical treatment to the insured persons. 2. Provision of medical benefits to the families of insured persons where such benefits are extended to their families. 3. Defraying charges and costs related to medical treatment and attendance for insured persons. 4. Payment of fees and allowances to members of the Corporation, standing committee, Medical Benefit Council, Regional Boards, Local committees, and Regional and Local Medical Benefit Council. 5. Payment of salaries, leave, joining time allowance, travelling and compensatory allowances, gratuities, compassionate allowances, pensions, and contributions to the Provident or any other benefit fund of officers. 6. The operation and maintenance of healthcare facilities, including dispensaries and hospitals, in addition to the delivery of auxiliary and medical services for the advantage of the insured persons and their families who are eligible for medical benefits. 7. Payment of contributions to any State Government, local authority, or private body or individual towards the cost of medical treatment and attendance provided to insured persons and their families, including the cost of any building and equipment, as per any agreement entered into by the Corporation. 8. Defraying the cost of auditing the accounts of the Corporation and the valuation of its assets and liabilities. 9. Defraying the cost of Employees’ Insurance Courts set up under the Act. 10. Payment of any sums under any contract entered into for the purposes of the Act by the Corporation, the Standing Committee, or any authorised officer. 11. The Corporation or any of its officers or servants may be held liable for any amount paid in accordance with a decree, order, or award of a court or tribunal. This also applies to payments made in compromise or settlement of any legal proceeding or claim brought against the Corporation. In the case of Bai Malimabu v. State of Gujarat [AIR 1978 SC 515], the Supreme Court held that the construction of staff quarters for the employees of the dispensary and other employees working under the Employees’ State Insurance scheme does not violate Section 28 of the Act. The construction of such quarters will undoubtedly be for public purposes, and such construction is closely connected with the workings and the implementation of the scheme. Done By: Seethala B , BBA., LL.B (Hons.), Junior Legal Consultant For Origin Law Labs