Basic Legal Tips on Insurance

So far, I have not been able to put up some work which will be understandable as well as useful for those friends of mine who do not belong to legal fraternity. So just thought to have a post which gives very basic idea about a few concepts in insurance contracts which will help you handle your insurance contracts and claims in a better and informed manner.

While I intend to cover a lot of things, this first article will cover few aspects in a nutshell and I will try and cover some other topics in later articles.

For the sake of convenience I have divided this whole article into three parts viz. ‘pre issuance’, ‘post issuance’ and ‘claims’ which will cover major concepts in the life cycle of a life insurance policy.

Pre Issuance:   

Let me first start with the concept of ‘Uberrima Fides’ which literally means ‘Utmost Good Faith’. An insurance contract is based on utmost good faith between the parties and hence it is of utmost importance that both the parties (proposer and the insurance company) are transparent, diligent and honest while entering into the contract.

us analyze what these three words mean for both the parties. Obviously both come to the table with different mindsets. One comes with a view to get best insurance-cover at lowest possible premium rates and the other with a view to earn some money out of the contract.   

So from the point of view of the customer or ‘proposer’ so to say ‘transparency and honesty’ would mean disclosure of all ‘material information’ that the company is seeking in the proposal form.

The term material information is not very difficult to understand. It is basically that information which is necessary for an insurance company to know to ‘underwrite’ the policy. ‘Underwriting’ a policy means analyzing and deciding whether a proposal be accepted or rejected. Decision as to whether the company wants to take the risk on a particular life on its books or not.  

So the next question arises as to, ‘how a lay man would know what is material for the insurance Company’?

It is simple. Legally speaking, any information that is sought by an insurance company in its proposal form and all other connected documents (medical questionnaire, supplementary financial forms, supplementary personal information form etc.) is material information and hence must be answered with full honesty and integrity.  

One must make sure that all medical, financial and personal (family) details are filled by one’s own hands and with utmost sincerity and honesty. It s important that every minute details that the proposal form seeks is filled up and rechecked before it is submitted for the company to consider.       

Be sure, that if the above point is taken care of, there will be no problems for you or your family in that eventuality to get the claim money.

While we talk about ease of getting money at claims stage, one must also ensure that the nomination details are filled up in the proposal form. It will save your family from unnecessary documentation and hassles in that unfortunate event when they have to lodge the claim with the insurance company.

Now that we have spoken about our responsibilities of being transparent and honest, let us understand what is it that insurance company needs to make sure to follow the principle of ‘utmost good faith’.

An insurance company is duty bound to explain all the benefits, charges, features, important terms and conditions like surrender rights, termination, and premium details of a life insurance policy and hence always pay attention to what an agent, broker or company representative is explaining to you.

If you are in doubt ask questions and ask for authorized and printed material like brochures, leaflets etc. make sure that the material shared by the agent is genuine. One can make out as to which material is genuine as it will always have certain crucial details like company logo, full name, registered office address, IRDAI registration number, CIN number etc.

One crucial document that one must see is ‘benefit illustration’. It is required to be signed by the proposer along with the proposal form and it gives a brief idea about how the product is going to give benefits. The document explains the benefits over the entire term of the policy and hence is an important tool to ascertain if the product is suitable to your needs or not.

If required one may also keep a copy of the proposal form that you fill up and submit with agent, broker or company representative. While the company will send one copy of the proposal form along with policy document the copy kept by you will help you ensure that your proposal is not changed and/or fabricated by anybody after you submitted it.  

Post Issuance:    

Most of us do not care to have a look at the life insurance policy once it is issued and sent to us by the company. I would suggest that one must go through the policy document as soon as it is received, for two simple reasons:

·         One, it will make sure that you have got what you had proposed for; and

·        Two, if you haven’t, then you will not lose upon your right to seek cancellation of the policy

The second bullet point brings us to yet another concept, which is unique to life insurance business and it is called ‘Free-Look Period’. As per prevailing regulations every insured has a right to go through the policy document within 15 days of its receipt and seek its cancellation in case of his disagreement with any terms and conditions of the policy.

In case the request is made duly in time the insurance company is liable to refund your premium after deducting stamp duty, medical expenses, if any and proportionate mortality charges.

It is, therefore, important to read the insurance policy in details as soon as it is received as any request made beyond those 15 days, gives right to the insurer to decline your request for cancellation.

Claims:

If the proposer has taken care of the points mentioned in above two heads then there will be no reason for an insurance company to decline the claim.   

One must ensure that whoever has been nominated under the policy is informed about the same. The nominee should also be made aware of the procedure as prescribed in the policy so that no hassles are faced while lodging a claim with the company.

Be aware that insurance company is under regulatory obligation to demand all necessary documents in one go and they can not ask for documents in a piecemeal. Please be also aware that insurance company has to decide the claim within 30 days from the date of receipt of all the relevant documents. Any delay in deciding the claim beyond the period of 30 days would make an insurance company liable to pay interest which is 2% higher than the bank rate prevailing in the year in which claim was reviewed.

However, in case where company feels that documents given by nominee/claimant are not sufficient it has a right to initiate investigation. The said investigation needs to be completed within a period of 180 days from the date of receipt of claim by the company. In such case, therefore, the period of 30 days will have to be computed from the date of completion of investigation or 180 days whichever is before.    

There are few more concepts relating to claims, which I will try and cover in my next article in this series.

Hope you find this article informative.   

Nuggets of Learning from Fali S Nariman's... "The State of The Nation"

Contrasting Provisions in the Constitution of India

The Constitution of India has various contradictions, embedded in it. One such contradiction is, while it creates 'equality before law' as a fundamental right', it also keeps room available for any reasonable law which may favour on sect, class or group of its citizens.

One such example could be : While the Constitution of India guarantees its citizens ‘equality before law’ there have been several amendments to bring forth some exceptions to the same. While the Constitution as originally promulgated had clearly defined the beneficiaries of the said benefits of exception there were several amendments at later date which carved out some more exceptions to the said fundamental right.

Preferential treatment for Women and Children was one such move, which tried to give additional support/benefits or preferential treatment to women and children.

An example could be the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act which gave equal rights to the daughters with sons in Mitakshara Coparcenery Properties. There were a few High Court orders which had ruled that partition decrees passed before the said amendment which are still in execution will not be affected by the said amendment, the Supreme Court vide its order in Prema VS Nanje Gawda and others, 2011 (6), SCC 462 overruled the same.

It is interesting to observe that while the amendments to the Constitution and various laws seem to create an exception to the rule of ‘equality’, the aim of all such laws/amendments is to bring everyone on the same level so that the ‘oppressed/exploited’ get their due. In a way, therefore, these amendments are meant to bring ‘equality’ and hence are in line with the basic intent of the Constitution.

..............................

        

Annual Return: [Contributed by Mr. M.K. Apte, Practicing Company Secretary, Indore (M.P.)]

ANNUAL RETURN:

The provisions relating to Annual Return are contained in Section 92 of the Companies Act, 2013. It is an important document, designed to provide information to all the interested persons in the company i.e. stakeholders. The return contains the information relating to the company, its promoters, members, meetings and remuneration of the directors and key managerial personnel. It is the intention of the law makers to improve the corporate governance and empower shareholders. It is a framework based on self-regulation with enhanced disclosures and accountability on the part of the companies and its management. Every company shall prepare its annual return in FORM No: MGT-7.

The documents required to prepare annual return:

1. Memorandum and Articles of Association.
2. Statutory Registers:

                      (a)    Register of members;
                      (b)   Register of Directors;
                      (c)    Register of Directors’ shareholding;
                      (d)   Register of Key Managerial Personnel;
                      (e)   Register of Related Party Transactions;
                      (f)     Register of loans and advances;
                      (g)   Register of Charges
                      (h)   Register of Securities

      3.      Minutes of the meetings of Members; Board of Directors and their committees;

      4.      Attendance register of all the meeting

      5.      Forms and receipts filed with the Registrar of Companies;

      6.      Indebtedness certificate signed by Company Secretary /CFO of the company as well as the                   Bank statement.

      7.      Latest audited financial statements

      8.      Copy of notice of annual general meeting

      9.      List of shareholders as on 1^st April and 31^st March

     10.  List of share transfers during the year.

     11.  Any orders received by the company from the High Court or from any other regulatory body.

     12.  List of promoters.

     13.  If necessary, we can take Management Representation letter

On the basis of the above registers and information, the information mentioned in the annual return is to be checked.

Further, in Point No: XI in the Annual Return a company has to give disclosure as to whether company has made all the compliances and disclosures during the year.  The certifying officer selects YES, it means, the certifying authority is certifying that not only the matters mentioned in Annual Report but also the company has complied with all the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 during the financial year. Further, the certifying authority is certifying that whatever mentioned in the annual return is true and no facts are concealed as per the original record maintained by the company. It means the certifying authority has checked all the original documents relating to the information mentioned in the annual return e.g. minutes, registers and other documents.

Provisions relating to authentication of an Annual Return:

Section 92(1) provides that the annual return shall be signed by a director and the company secretary or where there is no company secretary, by a company secretary in practice. In relation to One Person Company and small company, the annual return shall be signed by the company secretary, or where there is no company secretary, by the director of the company.

Further, in case of a listed company or a company having a paid up share capital of Ten Crores Rupees or more or turnover of fifty crore rupees or more, shall be certified by a company secretary in practice and the certificate shall be in Form No: MGT-8.

While certifying the annual return, it becomes necessary for a company secretary to certify the annual return only after scrutinizing and checking all the originals (copy of which may be obtained from the company and retained with him) and to find that the information submitted in the Annual Return matches with the originals.

Proposal deposit on the Life Insurance Proposal... Whether liable for Service Tax

Recently the Service Tax department has served notices to almost all the life insurance companies raising demand of service tax, interest on late payment, penalties etc. on the amount of proposal deposit that it collects from the prospective policyholders (proposers) and which does not get converted into a life insurance policy.

The Departments stand contends that insurers are wrongly paying service tax only once the proposals get converted into policies and excluding the proposal deposits which get refunded, thereby causing loss to the exchequer.  

The whole premise of the said notice is based roughly on the following 4-5 points:

• ·   Life Insurer’s accept proposal deposit from the prospective policyholders along with the proposal forms, which is nothing but an advance premium for services to be rendered;
• ·   The said proposal deposit is then adjusted towards the premium once the policy is issued and hence the act of collecting the said proposal deposit from the prospective policyholder is nothing but ‘agreeing to provide’ service which is taxable under the prevailing Service Tax Law;
• ·    The premium so collected in advance is available for the Company to use and invest and hence company has an opportunity to earn money and but still not paying service tax;
• ·   The provisions of Section 65(105)(zx) of the Service Tax Act, while discussing taxability of life insurance, covers not only the concept of ‘policyholder’ but also ‘or any person’ and hence the prospective policyholders whose proposals are not accepted squarely et covered as any person;
• ·    The insurers may first pay the service tax and then in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6.3 of the Service Tax Rules, may claim refund and/or adjustment of the same against then present liability and avoid loss to the exchequer caused on account of delayed payment;   

In my personal opinion the said notice will not stand the test of law on the following grounds:

To analyze the whole issue it becomes imperative that the concept of services under life insurance business is understood vis a vis the provisions of the Service Tax Act, so that it can be analyzed if proposal deposits can be said to be taxable.  

First and the foremost point is that the Service Tax Laws as amended till date levy Service Tax on the basis of amounts received towards taxable service provided or agreed to be provided.

The provisions of Section 2(11) of the Insurance Act, 1938 (Amended till date) the term life insurance business is defined as ‘business of effecting contract of insurance of human life including contract whereby the payment of money is insured on the happening of death of any other event’.

It is pertinent to note here that the provisions of Section 65(61) of the Service Tax Act also recognize the same definition for the term ‘life insurance business’.

Further the provisions of section 65(105)(zx) while discussing Taxable services in relation to life insurance business states ‘to a policyholder  or any person, by an insurer including reinsurer carrying on life insurance business…’  

Now, if we look at the whole process that goes into executing a life insurance contract, it comes to the light that the insurers collect proposal deposit along with proposal forms, which in pure contract term is an offer from the prospective policyholder. It’s important to note that no invoice is issued, but only an acknowledgment of proposal deposit is issued at this point in time.

The insurance company parks said proposal deposit in a separate account till the time it evaluates the proposal. The said evaluation process is called as ‘underwriting’ in insurance parlance. Only once the underwriting is done, the insurer comes to know if proposal is to be accepted or declined.

The proposal deposit for all the declined proposals is refunded in full and the ones which are accepted, their proposal deposit is transferred to premium accounts and policies along with invoices are issued.     

Keeping aforesaid in mind any life insurance company will provide or agree to provide any service only once a contract of insurance is entered into. Infact the contract of insurance being a long term contract is in itself a contract where an insurer agrees to provide services over a period of the policy.

Mere underwriting of a policy cannot be termed as a service or agreement to provide service since, in any ways if policy is declined, entire proposal deposit is refunded. Even if for the sake of argument it is assumed that the underwriting is a ‘Service’, in my view service tax is not chargeable on the services which are provided for free/without charging any service fee/charge.

The second question that arises is that of interpretation of the term ‘any person’ as contemplated under the provisions of Section 65(105)(zx) of the Service Tax.

In my opinion since the life insurance business as per definition itself is a business of providing ‘contracts of life insurance’, the same can by no stretch of imagination be extended to ‘proposal underwriting’ in the garb of saying it’s a service to ‘prospective policyholder‘, who falls within the ambit of ‘any person’.

In a life insurance business the term ‘any person’ can be said to include nominees, legal heirs, life assured (CI Riders) or members and their nominees/legal heirs in a group insurance policy. All these may be separate for a policyholder and as such the act intends to cover all those contracts where the policyholder is not actually served by the insurance company but someone else is being served.

Lastly the argument extended by the department that the insurance companies can make payment of service tax as soon as the proposal deposit is collected and then seek refund of the same if the proposal is not accepted, just goes to demonstrate that the Department in a way admits the fact that proposal deposit on any proposal that is not accepted is not liable for service tax. 

Further in my view the intent of the legislature behind including provisions like Rule 6.3 Service Tax Rule is to provide protection to the assessee in case of erroneous excess payments.

If the service tax is paid on all proposal deposits collected then it would mean payment of service tax is made on the basis of an assumption that the insurer will either provide service or agree to provide service to all the prospective policyholders and not on the actual agreement to provide service.

It is only a matter of time that we will come to know as to which stand holds good before the Courts.

Would love to get views (favour/against) from all the stakeholders going through this blog.

‘Freedom of Speech and Expression v/s Obscenity’

In recent times we have had a lot of debates about fundamental right of speech and expression. One classic and most recent example, that comes to every one’s mind is the ‘Kiss of Love Campaign’ or ‘Kiss of Love Protest’ so to say, that seems to be rapidly spreading like a fashion trend across metro cities.

But the big question is, on whose side the law stands, in this fight between ‘So called preachers of freedom of expression’ and ‘Self proclaimed protectors of morality’?

To understand the issue we will have to go through a few important concepts prescribed in Indian Constitution and the provisions prescribed in the Indian Penal Code. We would also have to analyze as to how the Apex Court has viewed the issue in recent times to get a hang of how the subject has evolved over the years.

The Constitution of India in Article 19(1)(a) guarantees ‘Freedom of Speech and Expression’ to every citizen of India. Which, basically means that every citizen of India has a fundamental right to freely express himself/herself by word of mouth, writing, printing, picture of in any other manner?

In the context of the aforementioned fundamental right anyone and everyone, who is a citizen of India, is free to express himself/herself in the way he/she feels most suitable for such expression.

But the Article 19(1)(a) is not without caveats and the right to speech and expression is not an absolute right, in as much as, Article 19(2) provides for conditions under which the said right may be restricted through operation of an existing law and/or state’s right to create a new law. One among the prescribed conditions, which is most important while dealing with the subject is ‘in the interest of decency or morality’.

This brings us to the provisions of Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which inter alia (among other things) prescribe imprisonment for a period of three months or fine or both to the person ‘who to the annoyance of others does any obscene act in public place.

It is interesting to note that no definition of the term ‘obscene’ has been prescribed for this particular section and a reference to the same can be drawn from the clarification given in Section 292 of IPC for any publication to be obscene ‘if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect, or (where it comprises two or more distinct items) the effect of any one of its items, is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt person, who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.’

Since there is no specific definition of the term ‘obscene’ prescribed, the test applied by the Courts over the years was dependent on the portion underlined in the above para. The said test was popularly known as ‘Hicklin Test’ in the judicial parlance, which was derived from the famous English case of Regina Vs. Hicklin. The judgment was an interpretation rendered while interpreting ‘Obscene Publication Act, 1857’.      

One would however, feel that the standards of morality in a society are constantly evolving and the test, whether something and/or some act has a potential to deprave and corrupt someone, would have to be seen through the prevailing social acceptance standards.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India recently in the matter of Aveek Sarkar and Another Vs. State of West Bengal and Others has laid down landmark judgment and has given several revolutionary observations such as:

while judging as to whether a particular photograph, an article or book is obscene, regard must be had to the  contemporary mores and national standards and not the standard of a group  of  susceptible  or sensitive persons’

We are also of the view that Hicklin test is not the correct test to be applied to determine "what is obscenity".   Section 292  of  the  Indian Penal Code,  of  course,  uses  the  expression  'lascivious  and  prurient interests' or its effect.  Later, it has also been indicated  in  the  said Section of the applicability of the effect and the necessity of taking  the items as a whole and on that foundation where  such  items  would  tend  to deprave and corrupt persons who  are  likely,  having  regard  to  all  the relevant circumstances, to read,  see  or  hear  the  matter  contained  or embodied in it.  We have, therefore, to apply the "community standard test" rather than "Hicklin test" to determine what is "obscenity".   A  bare reading of Sub-section (1) of Section 292 , makes clear that a  picture  or article shall be deemed to be obscene (i) if  it  is  lascivious;  (ii)  it appeals to the prurient interest, and (iii) it tends to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely to read, see or  hear  the  matter,  alleged  to  be obscene.  Once the matter is found to be obscene, the question may arise as to whether the impugned matter falls within any of the exceptions contained in Section.  A picture of a nude/semi-nude woman, as such, cannot per se be called obscene unless it has the tendency to arouse feeling or revealing an overt sexual desire.  The picture should be suggestive of deprave mind and designed to excite sexual passion in persons who are likely to see it, which will depend on the particular posture and the background in which the nude/semi-nude woman is depicted.  Only those sex-related materials which have a tendency of "exciting lustful thoughts" can be held to be obscene, but the obscenity has to be judged from the point of view of an average person, by applying contemporary community standards.

The judgment goes on to analyze various judgments passed by the Supreme Court and comes to a conclusion that no specific definition of the term ‘Obscene’ can be given as it has to be seen in the context of the entire issue and by application of standards which are contemporary and not archaic.   

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has, however, also discussed the case of Ranjit D. Udeshi, where it suggests as follows:

The test must obviously be of a general character but it must admit of a just application from case to case by indicating a line of demarcation not necessarily sharp but sufficiently distinct to distinguish between that which is obscene and that which is not.

It has thus stressed upon the fact that the definition of term ‘obscene’ cannot be completely a generic one but the same needs to be decided on case to case basis.

Taking a cue from the aforementioned discussion, ‘can kissing in public be treated as obscene’ or can it be termed as ‘just an expression of love and affection and not amounting to breach of moral standards and hence purely within the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution’?

In my opinion the same would again differ on case to case basis and every expression will have to be tested on the basis of facts and circumstances of each case.

While I firmly believe, that there is no space for any hard line response to any public expression of love and affection and random registration of cases under IPC. I also feel that widespread mindless protests, demonstrations and campaigns are starting to take a form, where it may have some elements of creating annoyance to others and a tinge of obscenity.

Related Party Transactions

In the modern day regime of the Companies Act, 2013 the legislature has shown its intent to move towards stricter governance norms for the corporations and lay down stringent norms for the way they conduct their business.

Even the industry regulators such as SEBI and IRDA have moved forward in this direction and have laid down different regulations/Guidelines, which mandate stricter governance and ethical norms for the companies to conduct their business, especially when it comes to Related Party Transactions..

One such area where the new statutory and regulatory regime has sought to bring in focus is ‘Related Party Transactions’. The Companies Act, 2013 through Section 188 and the Regulators in the form of Clause 49 of the Equity Listing Agreements and the IRDA Governance Guidelines for Insurance Companies, has come out with certain requirements which try and bring about better governance when the Companies get involved into related party transactions.

In the coming paragraphs of this work, I will try to put my thoughts on certain important aspects of the Related Party Transactions.

The provisions of Section 2(76) define the term ‘Related Party’ and broadly includes director or his relatives, Key Managerial Person (KMP), Firm in which director, KMP or his relative is a partner, private company in which any of these three are director and/or member, public companies in which they are either member or hold (together with relatives) more than 2% paid-up share capital, any body corporate whose directors, MD or manager act in accordance with directions of such directors, KMP or their relatives and the Holding/Subsidiary or associate Companies etc.

The said definition of the related party is much broader in its scope and clarity as compared to the one prescribed under the Accounting Standard 18, in as much as the later focuses on the aspect of ‘significant influence’, whereas the Companies Act, 2013 clearly defines the exact nature of relationships which will fall under the ambit of related party.

Having understood the broad definition of the term ‘related party’, the provisions of section 188 of the Companies Act, 2013 mandate the dos and don’ts while getting into a related party transaction.

The provisions of Section 188 provide that no company shall enter into a contract or agreement with a related party, without the consent of the Board of Directors given by a resolution.

The nature of agreements and contracts as prescribed under the said section are:

• Sale, purchase or supply of any goods/material;
• Selling and/or disposing or buying property (any kind);
• Leasing of property of any kind;
• Availing or rendering any services;
• Appointing of any agent for aforementioned purposes;
• Appointment of related party to office of profit;
• Underwriting the subscription of any securities or derivatives of the Company

The section further mandates approval of the Shareholders in a general meeting through a special resolution, if the paid up share capital of the Company is more than as prescribed (10 Crores) under the Rules framed under the Act or the value of such transaction is exceeding the limits prescribed under the said rules.

  

The section, however, excludes transactions entered in the ordinary course business other than those which are not on an ‘arm’s length’ basis.

Terms arm’s length is defined as a transaction entered into by the related parties as if they were unrelated so that there is no conflict of interest.

From the above brief discussion a sequence of events in the following order would be required to be followed by the Companies while they are proposing to enter into any transaction that may fall within the ambit of ‘related party transaction’.

The IRDA on the other hand mandates disclosure of all related party transaction in L-30 in accordance with the AS-18 under the auspices of Corporate Governance Guidelines and the Regulations on preparation of Financial Statements.

The Act also prescribes certain deterrents in the form of contracts with related parties being voidable at the option of the board, indemnification by interested directors and penalties of up to 25 lakhs in unlisted companies and jail term of up to one year in case of listed companies.    

Section 177 of the Companies Act, 2013 also makes a mention of the ‘Related Party Transactions’, but that is more in the form of rights of the Audit Committee to review certain things which have been put up before it by the Board of the Company.

While reading on the subject, I have come across opinions where Approval of Audit Committee of the board, has been mentioned as the minimum requirement for any RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS to be taken up by the Company.

However, I am of the view that the Audit committee, by its very constituents, is an independent body, which is meant to review and opine on wide range of issues, including but not limited to related party transaction, for the sake of better governance. Any thought of approval of any transaction by audit committee would translate into the audit committee becoming an interested party, which is against the very intent of the legislature.

In my view, therefore, before getting into any RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION the Companies need to ensure the following:

·         The transaction is in ordinary course of business and is at Arm’s length;

·    To demonstrate the above it needs to have ready information e.g. comparative pricing, type of services rendered, cost benefit analysis to justify the transaction, to name a few;

·         Alternatively seek prior approval of the board and shareholders (if any required).

In a nutshell the new Act lays down huge importance on the fact that, in the modern day era of diversification, while utilization of resources and capabilities within the same group companies may help saving on costs and optimization of resources, any misuse of related party transaction may lead to loss to the stakeholders.

In coming days I would also try and put some effort on analyzing Clause 49 requirements for the Related Party Transactions, which are important for the listed companies.

Views, Opinions, discussions are welcome....

The Beginning

Having a blog of my own was playing on  my mind for quite some time now. But the question was, what will I write on the blog?

It surely can't be an activity just to kill time.

So as of now, I have decided to put some of my professional experiences and/or views on varied issues which relate to my professional day to day work and fields of law that I deal on a daily basis. 

Over a period of next few days, I intend to try and collate some of the works, that I have been involved in my daily professional life and pen them here with an intent to share the experiences, seek others opinions and create a forum where I can discuss various legal issues with people who have interest, experience and know how in similar field as mine.

Going ahead, I also intend to use this space for some pro bono work and hope that I can put the experience gained during my professional life to good use.

Its just a small beginning and I hope things turn out well.


7.09.2014