Saturday, November 10, 2018

Calling Husband ‘Impotent’ In Pleadings Can Amount To Defamation: Bombay HC

The word “impotent” when understood in its plain and grammatical sense, reflects adversely upon the manhood of a person and has a tendency to invite derisive opinions about such person from others
The Bombay High Court has held that calling a husband ‘impotent’ in pleadings can amount to ‘defamation’.
A defamation complaint was filed by a husband alleging that his wife made some statements casting aspersions on his potency, in a writ petition filed by her before the high court. Summons issued by the magistrate to the wife was challenged before the high court.
The high court rejected the contention put forth by counsel appearing for the wife that whenever an allegation made in litigation is found to be true, it does not amount to defamation within the meaning of Section 499 of IPC. It was also contended that when the complaint is founded on an allegation in a plaint filed in a civil proceeding and has been found to be false, the offence would not be that of defamation punishable under Section 500 of IPC, but an offence relating to giving of false evidence punishable under Section 193 of IPC.
In this regard, Justice SB Shukre observed: “The offence is essentially of something which is a matter of evidence or law and not of pleadings. If any defamatory statement is made in pleadings, what would arise would be an offence of defamation punishable under Section 500 read with Section 499 of IPC and not of offence of giving false evidence punishable under Section 193 read with Section 191 of IPC.”
The counsel also contended that by the term ‘impotent’, what the wife meant was that due to some medical problem of the husband, the conception of the child was not possible.
Rejecting the said contention, the court observed: “Even if the expression “impotent person”, as the learned Counsel for the applicant would like this Court to do, is read in all its contextual setting, in particular, in the context of the birth of the child by adopting a medical procedure on the suggestion of the Gynecologist, still the apparent harm that the expression “impotent person” causes, is not diluted or washed out. This is for the reason that prima facie the word “impotent” when understood in it’s plain and grammatical sense, reflects adversely upon the manhood of a person and has a tendency to invite derisive opinions about such person from others and, therefore, use of such word and its publication as contemplated under Section 499 of IPC would be sufficient to constitute, in a prima facie manner, the offence of defamation punishable under Section 500 of IPC. Now, if the non-applicant submits that this word has been used by her in some different sense denoting condition of the non-applicant affecting the process of conception, it would be a matter of evidence to be proved accordingly. At this stage, the meaning apparently indicated by the word would have to be taken as it is. Then, such imputation has been made by filing a writ petition and, therefore, the other ingredient of publication is also fulfilled in the present case. Therefore, prima facie, the offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC is made out in this case.”

Thursday, November 8, 2018

Father Can File Application U/s 21 Of Domestic Violence Act Seeking Visitation Rights To Child: Bombay HC

If it is held that the husband, in absence of any application for grant of custody can maintain his application for visitation right will advance the object of the provision.”
The Bombay High Court recently upheld a lower court order that allowed an application filed by a father under Section 21 of the Domestic Violence Act, granting him visitation rights to his child.
In this case, the wife had filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking relief under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the said Act. An application filed by the husband under Section 21 of the Act in the said proceedings was allowed granting him visitation rights to keep custody of his child for 48 hours for twice in a month. This order was upheld by the district court.
The wife then approached the high court contending that the husband has no right to independently prefer an application for custody orders as contemplated under Section 21 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The relevant provision itself says that such an application u/s 21 of the DV Act can be preferred by the aggrieved person or any person on her behalf during the pendency of her application under for any reliefs under the DV Act.
But, Justice Prakash D Naik observed that such an interpretation will render the provision incomplete. The court observed: “If the interpretation given on behalf of the wife aggrieved parties accepted it will render the provision incomplete as in case where wife – aggrieved party seeks custody of the child, if the child is in custody of the husband and an order of custody is passed in favour of the aggrieved party, visitation right can be granted to the husband. But if custody lies with the wife – aggrieved party, than the husband will have no remedy of visitation right if the interpretation as contemplated by the wife – aggrieved party is given effect to and thereby it can easily be said that interpretation given by the aggrieved party – wife will never advance the cause of the child. On the other hand, if it is held that the husband, in absence of any application for grant of custody can maintain his application for visitation right will advance the object of the provision as in case of child being in custody of the husband, application for custody can be filed by the wife wherein the husband can have visitation right if order is of custody of child passed in favour of the aggrieved party. In other situation, when the custody of the child lies with the wife, there would be no occasion for the wife for filing an application for custody. In that situation, husband will have remedy to have visitation right by filing application to that effect. The said interpretation and observations can be applied in the present case.”
The court also rejected the contention put forth on behalf of the wife that the husband could have approached other forums. It said: “The respondent had not asked for custody of the child for the simple reason that the child is already in her custody. It is the respondent i.e. father who has sought merely visitation right to his son which right was granted to him by the Trial Court that too for limited days. In case the visitation right is not given to the petitioner, minor child would be deprived of father’s love and affection. The paramount consideration is welfare of child. The petitioner could not be faced to seek remedy either under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, as observed by the Sessions Court as it would lead to multiplicity of litigation. The Act is a self contained code.”
The court finally upheld the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate.

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

Sabarimala : Kerala HC Dismisses Petition Against Implementing SC Judgment On Women Entry

The High Court of Kerala today dismissed a petition filed by National Ayyaappa Devotees Association and few others against the implementation of Supreme Court’s judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Associaiton case, which permitted entry of women of all age groups to Sabarimala temple.
The petition was filed contending that the SC judgment was merely “declaratory in nature”, without casting any positive obligation on the State Government to implement it. It was also stated that the PIL in the apex court was not filed by devotees and that the same was based on newspaper reports. Therefore, the petition contended that the judgment of the Supreme Court was ‘per incuriam’ and ‘sub silentio’ and not binding on Ayyappa devotees.
The Division Bench of Justices P R Ramachandra Menon and N Anilkumar held that the High Court cannot examine the scope and correctness of the Supreme Court judgment. The Division Bench also noted that the petitioners have already approached the Supreme Court filing a writ petition seeking to set aside the Sabarimala judgment. The petitioner has also sought review of the same. These petitions are to be considered by the SC next week.Regarding this the Court observed that the petitioners cannot pursue two parallel remedies before different courts simultaneously.
Petitioner’s counsel Advocate Mathews Nedumpara submitted that the State Government has misunderstood the declaration given by SC and has adopted hasty measures to implement the judgment, which has resulted in converting Sabarimala into a “warzone”. The judgment of the SC ,which is merely a declaratory one, is misunderstood to be one which requires its compliance and execution, as the SC did not issue any order or direction- the counsel submitted. The argument however did not weigh with the Court. The Court held that the issue can be addressed only by the SC. The Court also expressed its unhappiness with the statement made in the petition that “This Hon’ble Court too happened to be misled to construe the said judgment as one requiring compliance”. The Court asked the Nedumpara as to the basis for making such a statement in the petition, upon which he conceded mistake. The Court also noted that the petition had technical defects as only one of the eight petitioners had attested the pleadings in the petition.
Clarifying that the Court was not expressing anything on the merits of the petition, the Court dismissed it, reserving the petitioners’ liberty to move the apex court seeking remedies.

Monday, November 5, 2018

UK opens up armed forces recruitment to more Indians

Ministry of Defence laid out the proposals before Parliament, which involves a waiver of the current requirement of a minimum of five-year residency in the UK for applying to join the country's Army, Navy or Air Force.PTI

Britain currently employs 4,500 Commonwealth citizens in the armed forces, with 3,940 in the Army, 480 in the Royal Navy and 80 serving in the RAF. (Source: AP)
The UK government on Monday announced a relaxation of recruitment criteria to allow Commonwealth nationals to apply for jobs in its armed forces in order to meet a shortage in its ranks.
The Commonwealth is an association of 53 independent states, including India.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) laid out the proposals in a written ministerial statement (WMS) before Parliament, which involves a waiver of the current requirement of a minimum of five-year residency in the UK for applying to join the country’s Army, Navy or Air Force.
This would open up the forces to recruits who have been based in countries like India, Australia, Canada and Kenya and meet the necessary recruitment criteria for the service and role they wish to join.
“We have now decided to remove the five-year UK residency criterion for Commonwealth citizens and increase recruitment to 1,350 across the Royal Navy, British Army and Royal Air Force (RAF),” the MoD statement reads.
“Applications will be accepted from all Commonwealth countries, although in order to mitigate the risks associated with unaccompanied minors travelling to the UK without the guarantee of a job, we will not be accepting applications from those under 18,” the statement adds.
A limited waiver to the residency requirement was introduced in May 2016 to recruit up to 200 Commonwealth personnel per year to fill skill shortage posts. This limited waiver has now been widened, with the RAF and Navy beginning recruitment of Commonwealth applicants right away and the Army to accept such applications from early 2019. Applications from citizens of countries outside the Commonwealth will not be accepted.
“Citizens from the Commonwealth have a long tradition of serving with distinction in the Armed Forces,” the MoD said.
Special rules already allow citizens of Ireland and Gurkhas from Nepal to join the British armed forces. The five-year UK residency requirement for Commonwealth recruits was first waived in 1998, before being reintroduced in 2013.
A National Audit Office (NAO) report had revealed in April this year that the UK’s armed forces is short of around 8,200 soldiers, sailors and air personnel. Among measures to meet this shortage, women are now allowed to apply for all roles in the British military for the first time in history.
Britain currently employs 4,500 Commonwealth citizens in the armed forces, with 3,940 in the Army, 480 in the Royal Navy and 80 serving in the RAF.

Lie Detector/Brain Mapping/Narco Analysis Tests Can’t Be Ordered While Considering Bail Plea: SC Pulls Up Gujarat HC For Disclosing Identity Of Victim

 “In the instant case, by ordering the above mentioned tests and venturing into the reports of the same with meticulous details, the High Court has converted the adjudication of a bail matter to that of a mini-trial indeed.”
The Supreme Court on Monday quashed a Gujarat High Court judgment that had ordered lie detector, brain mapping and narco-analysis tests on the accused and grandmother, parents of the victim, in a bail application filed by the accused.
Examining these reports, the high court had also granted bail to the accused.
A ‘surprised’ apex court bench of Justice NV Ramana and Justice Mohan M Shantanagoudar said ordering such tests is not only in contravention to the first principles of criminal law jurisprudence but also violates statutory requirements.
The bench said that, while considering bail application, courts usually take into consideration the gravity of the crime, the character of the evidence, position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and witnesses, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, the possibility of his tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the course of justice and such other grounds. The bench also added that the court must not undertake a meticulous examination of the evidence collected by the police, or rather order specific tests as done in the present case.
In the instant case, by ordering the above mentioned tests and venturing into the reports of the same with meticulous details, the High Court has converted the adjudication of a bail matter to that of a mini-trial indeed. This assumption of function of a trial court by the High Court is deprecated,” it said.
The court also took serious note of the high court order that had disclosed the name of the “victim” throughout the impugned order. Referring to Section 228A IPC and provisions of the POCSO Act, the bench said no disclosure of any particular(s) of the victim is allowed which can eventually lead to the disclosure of the identity of the victim.
Taking note that the special leave petition against this high court order has been filed by the grandmother of the victim and not by the state, the bench remarked: “The lethargic attitude of the State by not taking necessary steps to bring the matter to the notice of this Court by filing an appeal despite the clear violations of settled principles of criminal law jurisprudence and statutory prescriptions. The present Special Leave Petition was filed by the grandmother of the victim and it is only on her behest that we took notice of the matter.”

Ahmedabad based NGO, Peace and Equality Cell approached SC on behalf of complainant grandmother Sangeetaben.Advocates Philip Mathew and Navneet Nair have drafted the Petition

Bombay HC Reads Down MRTP Act Provision Which Permitted En-Bloc Regularization Of Illegal Constructions

‘By exercising the power under section 52A, unauthorised development which is contrary to the provisions of the Development Plans/Regional Plans under the MRTP Act and the Development Control Regulations framed under the MRTP Act shall not be declared as a compounded structure.’
The Bombay High Court has read down the provisions of section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and struck down Rules 4 (partly), 5 and 7 of the Compounded Structures Rules holding that they offend Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
The bench comprising Justice AS Oka and Justice AK Menon read down Section 52-A of the MRTP Act to mean that non obstante clause in sub-section (1) of Section 52-A does not enable the planning authorities or the state government to compound unauthorized developments which are contrary to the provisions of the development plans/regional plans under the MRTP Act and the Development Control Regulations framed under the MRTP Act. It said that by exercising the power under section 52A, an unauthorised development which is contrary to the provisions of the Development Plans/Regional Plans under the MRTP Act and the Development Control Regulations framed under the MRTP Act shall not be declared as a compounded structure.
A number of PILs were filed challenging the validity of Section 52A of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 which provides for en-bloc regularization of a very large number of illegal structures constructed in the state on or before 31st December. Their contention was that the said amendment, brought last year, destroys and defeats the very concept of town planning.
The bench observed thus in 138-page judgment: “If a provision or statute permits en-bloc regularization of illegal construction by completely overriding the provisions of the MRTP Act, DCR and draft or Development/Regional Plan it will surely constitute violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. But the law can be justified by the State by producing material which is not done by the State in this case. If a statute permits regularization of illegal development carried out before a cut off date, which is otherwise legal and it is illegal only on the ground that the same has been carried out without obtaining development permission, such a statute may not attract violation of Article 21. There is no violation of the town planning involved in such regularization. In the present case, if section 52A read is with the Compounded structure Rules, it permit regularization of illegal construction of multi storied buildings on public properties, on the lands reserved for public purposes, on the lands acquired for public purpose etc. We find for the reasons already set out that the provisions of section 52A and Rules 4, 5 and 7 Compounded structures Rules offend Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.”
The court also struck down Clauses (d) and (e) of Rule 4 (only to the extent to which the same permit compounding of structures contrary to provisions regarding zones) as well as Rules 5 and 7 of the Compounded Structure Rules.
The court further illustrated: “If construction of a building is carried out without obtaining development permission under the MRTP Act and the permissions required under the Municipal laws, it can be regularized if (i) all the required parameters such as size of the plinth, available FSI, necessary safeguards for fire fighting etc as provided in the DCR are taken care of and (ii)the structure can be made conforming to the provisions of DCR. By exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of section 52-A, such structure could be compounded if necessary, by imposing a condition to modify or alter the structure to bring it in conformity with the DCR. Obviously, if FSI is used which is more than what is permissible under the MRTP Act and the DCR framed thereunder, the structure to the extent to which additional F.S.I has been used cannot be regularized. If the DCR requires open spaces and set back to be provided in a particular manner, unless such provisions are complied with, the structure cannot be regularized. If DCR provides that only owner or lessee of property can apply for development permission, the structure can be regularized or compounded only if owner or lessee apply for regularization. Moreover, a structure made on a public property by encroaching upon it cannot be regularized.”
Referring to various apex court judgments, the bench said: “The Planning Authorities and the State will have to show zero tolerance to illegal constructions and it is the duty of the Planning Authority to take immediate steps for demolition of illegal developments. It is also their duty to ensure that such illegal developments are prevented and therefore, as far as PILs concerning Navi Mumbai are concerned, interim orders directing survey of illegal constructions, creation of Grievance Redress Mechanism etc. will have to be continued as final directions.”

Medical establishments to be covered under 2017 Act: Bombay High Court

Under the act establishments of medical practitioners including clinics, hospitals and dispensaries, with 10 or more employees are to be registered with the state government and those with lesser staff to be intimated to the local facilitator.

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court on Friday upheld the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Maharashtra Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 2017 under which establishments of medical practitioners including clinics, hospitals and dispensaries, with 10 or more employees are to be registered with the state government and those with lesser staff to be intimated to the local facilitator.
A division bench of Justice R K Deshpande and Justice Vinay Joshi was hearing a petition filed by Pradeep Arora (61), a general and paediatric surgeon, who runs Arora Hospital in Nagpur. Arora had challenged the definition of “establishment” under Section 2(4) of the Act. He argued that the inclusion of the profession and the establishment of any medical practitioner in the definition of “establishment” under the Act are liable to be struck down as the constitutional right to practice the profession or occupation of a doctor and the state government had not held any pre-legislative consultation before enforcing the Act.
The provisions of the Act require establishments, including medical facilities, with 10 or more employees to comply with the employment conditions mandated under the Act and those with lesser employees to be registered with the facilitator bringing the employer under statutory obligation to comply with it.
“..the Legislature seems to have adopted a practical approach based upon the data available with it indicating that the concept of medical tourism has also increased the commercial aspect of medical establishments. There are large multi­speciality hospitals, chains of hospitals spreading across inter­district, inter­state resulting in huge employment and engagement of huge work­force in the sector. It, therefore, became necessary to safeguard the interest of the employees and regulate their employment, conditions of service and provide them social security from being exploited under the garb of urgent work,” the bench observed in its 37-page order.
An establishment registered under the 2017 Act, requires the employer to fill online forms, declarations, documents stating the number of employees and their work hours, among others; prohibits discrimination between men and women employees; daily and weekly hours of work and interval for rest and protection of women from sexual harassment among others.
Advocate General A A Kumbhakoni told the court that to come under the definition of “establishment” under the Act, there should be a systematic activity, organised by cooperation between employer and employee and for the production and/or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes.
“In our view, it is the harmonious activity carried out in cooperation amongst all the partners in the establishment to render material services to the community with the help of capital, which is covered by the definition of “establishment” under Section 2(4) of the new (2017) Act. Whether the establishment is running in profit or loss is of no consequence” the court observed. It said that Kumbhakoni was right in urging that it is a matter of legislative policy and wisdom as to the types of establishments to be included in the definition,” the bench observed.
Dismissing Arora’s petition, the court noted, “The objects and reasons of the new Act… not only take into consideration the regulation of conditions of employment, but also provide social security benefits to the employees covered by it. It deals with the statutory liabilities of employer of medical establishment. The new Act is modelled on the legislation suggested by the central government to bring about uniformity and equity in the provisions of law enforcement, to improve public accountability, transparency and to facilitate the ease of doing business and create new jobs”.

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

SC order helps 6 poor families get ₹75L aid

A Supreme Court direction in a case of bonded labour has brought joy and hope to a group of 14 men, women and children from six families- each of their bank accounts swelled by ₹4.75 lakh. The SC registry deposited the cash into the accounts of the victims of the regressive practice of bonded labour. The cash was given by the convicts to secure their bail.

The SC had, on September 21, 2017, issued an order stating that the bail applications of the two convicts in the case, K Sivakumar and Munusamy Naidu, would be considered only if they handed over ₹75 lakh to the court registry on or before October 6 the same year.

The amount paid by them was deposited into the accounts of the victims on a pro rata basis. They were rescued on August 9, 2005 from a rice mill by revenue officials, who acted upon the information from IJM, an NGO.

The rescued bonded labours were informed about the cash deposits three days ago. “We were surprised when my uncle (Ramalingam) told us that ₹4.75 lakh was deposited in his account. I checked my account and found the account balance had increased to ₹4,77,061 lakh from ₹2,061,” said 28 yearold Chinnarasu, who was rescued along with his parents, Malliga and Mari.

Fake papers used for 68 HDFC Bank jobs

Bank Files Plaint Against Gurgaon Firm

One of India’s largest private lenders, HDFC Bank, has filed a police complaint against a Gurgaon-based consultancy firm that allegedly used forged documents to place 68 candidates in various positions, from assistant manager to branch manager, with the bank over two years.
The racket was exposed during a reference check of an employee, Geetanjali Bagga, by the bank in February. According to the bank’s police complaint, Bagga joined HDFC Bank as an assistant manager in October 2017.
During the reference check in February 2018, it came to light that she had been supported by Adeco Consultancy during the recruitment process and had submitted forged salary slips, experience certificates, and other documents. Bagga, during an internal investigation, revealed she had paid around Rs 60,000 to Amit Choudhary, who runs the agency. The bank subsequently opened an investigation into other candidates who had been placed through Adecco and found 68 employees had submitted forged documents in the past couple of years while joining HDFC Bank.
Out of the 68, around 51 were employees of the bank when the investigation was being conducted. One of them revealed the agency was run by Amit and his friend Satyendra Pal. Other than Adeco, some documents also used the names Lotus Consultancy and Aspire Consultancy.
Satyendra, who was the manager of HDFC Bank’s Noida Sector 135 branch, told the bank, according to the police complaint, that he had himself paid Rs 1.45 lakh to Adeco for his selection. After joining the bank, he used to train candidates for interviews with the bank and helped them in clearing online tests.
The bank approached police in September. After completing a preliminary investigation, an FIR was filed on Sunday at Sector 53 police station against Amit Choudhary alias Rohit Kumar, his wife, and HDFC Bank employees Komal Kushwaha and Vishal Pandey. They were booked under sections 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery), 468, 471 and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.

SC rejects challenge to Trai capping cost of TV channels, bouquets

In an important judgment that will benefit millions of television viewers, the Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a challenge to Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s power to regulate and cap the subscription price of channels and bouquets offered by broadcasters.

Star India Private Ltd and others had challenged Trai’s decision to fix a uniform maximum retail price for each TV channel at Rs 19 and stipulated that a channel, which was individually priced at more than Rs 19, could not be included in a collection of channels (bouquet) and could only be offered on an individual/a la carte/standalone basis. It had also stipulated that pay channels and free to air channels, as also HD and standard channels, could not be in the same bouquet.
Appearing for broadcasters, senior advocates A M Singhvi and P Chidambaram had argued that such regulation by Trai violated the copyright of broadcasters over the content on the channels. Rejecting the arguments, a bench of Justices Rohinton F Nariman and Navin Sinha, in a 123-page judgment, said Trai was protecting public interest of millions of viewers by capping the price of channels and broadcasters’ copyright was subservient to the public interest.
Justice Nariman said, “We do not find on a reading of the impugned regulation as well as the tariff order made that Trai has transgressed into copyright land.”

Turkey eases visa rules, Indians set to benefit

Turkey has relaxed its policy of not issuing visas on arrival (VoA) from October 28 to a number of nationalities, including Indians.
Indian passport holders who have valid visa or residence permit from Schengen, US, UK and Ireland will be eligible for Turkish e-visa, said Deniz Ersoz, culture and tourism counsellor at the Turkish Embassy.
Such Indians “can obtain their e-visa on the site https:// in three minutes for a fee of $44.5,” Ersoz said.
Indians who do not have valid visas or residence permits of these countries will, however, need to apply for sticker visa, with the single entry visa fee being Rs 3,940.
“Turkish e-visa is equivalent to the Turkish sticker visa issued at Turkish missions.
With e-visa one can enter from any border gate to Turkey and stay along the period that e-visa allows,” he added.
Asked if passengers transiting through airports in Turkey need a transit visa, he said: “If passengers are not leaving international transit area, they do not need any type of visa. It is advised to confirm the matter with airlines company if exiting transit area would be needed.”

No copyright on Patel community: Court

Rejects Patel Jeweller Vs Patel Jeweller Lawsuit

Patel is a community name and one cannot have a trademark right over this word. Similarly, jeweller is a person dealing in jewellery and one cannot stake copyright on this trade too.
A commercial court here observed this concluding that nobody can have a sole trademark right over ‘Patel Jewellers’ and cannot deter anybody from using this title for business.
The court recently turned down an application filed by a Mehsana-based jeweller Jitendra Patel demanding to restrain a famous Mumbai-based ‘Patel Jewellers’ from using the name for the business.

Jitendra Patel of Patel Jewellers sued Mumbai’s shopowners, in all 13 different shops, in March after they came to know the latter’s intent to open a showroom in Mehsana town in north Gujarat. He claimed that his family has been using trademark/tradename ‘Patel Jewellers’ since 1990 and got it registered also. He objected to Mumbai’s firm using the same title for business on the ground that his family was the first mover in the market and had earned considerable goodwill.

On the other hand, Mumbai’s firm also claimed to be the first mover in the market with the same title since 1993 in Maharashtra and Gujarat. The firm's lawyer claimed that they first issued a legal notice to Mehsana’s firm after they came to know about the illegal use of the tradename. In return, the Mehsana’s firm issued cross-notice and approached a civil court in Ahmedabad.
Both the firms showed their accounts since the inception of their firms to establish that their turnover has been in crores due to their goodwill. After a brief battle on factual aspects, the Mumbai firm’s advocate argued that the word ‘Patel Jewellers’ was not coined by the Mehsana’s jeweller, but Patel is a community and jeweller is a word used for a person engaged in the trade of jewellery. Hence, the Mehsana’s firm cannot claim exclusiveness over the word.
Judge M C Tyagi accepted this argument and said, “Patel is a well-known community in Gujarat. It is also not in dispute that the word jeweller means a person who carries on trade or business of jewellery. Therefore, the combination of both the words and as well as any single word is common and generic. None of the parties can claim exclusivity over the word Patel Jewellers.”

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

SC Issues Directions On Examination Of Witnesses In Criminal Trial

 ‘While deciding an Application under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C., a balance must  be struck  between the  rights of  the  accused, and  the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence’
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, listed out ‘practical guidelines’ to be followed by trial courts in the conduct of a criminal trial, ‘as far as possible’.
While setting aside a Kerala High court order, the bench comprising of Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Indu Malhotra observed that while deciding an Application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence.
The bench was considering an application against a Kerala High court order that had set aside a trial court order which had refused to defer cross examination of some witnesses. Allowing the accused’s petition, the High court had directed that the cross-examination of some witnesses be adjourned till after the examination­in­ chief of a particular witness.
On state’s appeal, the apex court bench observed that High Court gave no reasons for reversal of the Trial court Order refusing to defer cross examination and that the order was too cryptic.
The bench said that following factors must be considered, while deciding an Application under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C
  • Possibility of undue influence on witness(es);
  • possibility of threats to witness(es);
  • possibility that non-deferral would enable subsequent witnesses giving evidence on similar facts to tailor their testimony to circumvent the defence strategy;
  • possibility of loss of memory of the witness(es) whose examination in chief has been completed;
  • Occurrence of delay in the trial, and the non availability of witnesses, if deferral is allowed, in view of Section 309(1) of the Cr.P.C.
Referring to some High court judgments, the bench said there cannot be a straitjacket formula providing for the grounds on which judicial discretion under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. can be exercised. “The exercise of discretion has to take place on a case-to case basis. The guiding principle for a Judge under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. is to ascertain whether prejudice would be caused to the party seeking deferral, if the application is dismissed.”
Practical Guidelines
The Court has listed out ‘practical guidelines’ to be followed by trial courts in the conduct of a criminal trial, as far as possible.
  • A detailed case-calendar must be prepared at the commencement of the trial after framing of charges;
  • the case-calendar must specify the dates on which the examination in chief and cross-examination (if required) of witnesses is to be conducted
  • The case-calendar must keep in view the proposed order of production of witnesses by parties, expected time required for examination of witnesses, availability of witnesses at the relevant time, and convenience of both the prosecution as well as the defence, as far as possible
  • Testimony of witnesses deposing on the same subject-matter must be proximately scheduled; v. the request for deferral under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. must be preferably made before the preparation of the case calendar;
  • The grant for request of deferral must be premised on sufficient reasons justifying the deferral of cross-examination of each witness, or set of witnesses;
  • While granting a request for deferral of cross-examinations of any witness, the trial courts must specify a proximate date for the cross-examination of that witness, after the examination-in-chief of such witness(es) as has been prayed for;
  • The case calendar, prepared in accordance with the above guidelines, must be followed strictly, unless departure from the same becomes absolutely necessary
  • In cases where trial courts have granted a request for deferral, necessary steps must be taken to safeguard witnesses from being subjected to undue influence, harassment or intimidation.

Even A Woman Of Easy Virtue Has A Right Of Refuse To Submit Herself To Sexual Intercourse To Anyone, SC Restores Conviction In Gangrape Case

‘The evidence of such a woman cannot be thrown overboard merely because she is a woman of easy virtue.’

Even assuming that the prosecutrix was of easy virtue, she has a right of refuse to submit herself to sexual intercourse to anyone, said a Supreme Court bench while restoring conviction of four men accused in a gangrape case.


Before the trial court, the accused in their statement under Section 313 CrPC, had stated that the prosecutrix was of bad character and she was indulging in prostitution. Though they told the court that a complaint was lodged by them against her, nothing was produced before the court. The trial court convicted them taking into account the evidence of the prosecutrix.
Before the high court, the alleged complaints lodged against the prosecutrix were submitted during the arguments in the appeal filed by the accused.  Taking note of this additional evidence, the high court observed that the trial court erred in saying that the accused failed to prove the making of previous complaints against the prosecutrix. The accused were acquitted by the high court.
Any material produced before the appellate court to fill up the gaps by either side can’t be considered
The bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Indira Banerjee observed that the high court was not right in taking into consideration those complaints produced at the time of arguments in the appeal. It said: “The power conferred under Section 391 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised with great care and caution. In dealing with any appeal, the appellate court can refer to the additional evidence only if the same has been recorded as provided under Section 391 Cr.P.C. Any material produced before the appellate court to fill-up the gaps by either side cannot be considered by the appellate court; more so, to reverse the judgment of the trial court. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Solicitor General, the High Court has taken into consideration the materials produced by the Bar, namely, complaints allegedly made against the prosecutrix and other women including the one allegedly given on 21.07.1997 just one week prior to the incident. The High Court was not right in taking into consideration those complaints produced at the time of arguments in the appeal.”
Evidence of such a woman cannot be thrown overboard
The bench approved the observations made by the trial court that even if the allegations of the accused that the prosecutrix is of immoral character are taken to be correct, the same does not give any right to the accused persons to commit rape on her against her consent.
Referring to judgment in State of Maharashtra and Another v. Madhurkar Narayan Mardikar, the bench said the evidence of such a woman cannot be thrown overboard merely because she is a woman of easy virtue. The bench further said that the high court erred in placing reliance upon the complaints allegedly made against the prosecutrix to doubt her version and to hold that a false case has been foisted against the accused.
The bench then restored the trial court judgment observing that conviction can be sustained on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it inspires confidence. Setting aside the high court verdict, the bench said: “The High Court erred in taking into consideration the materials produced before the appellate court viz., the alleged complaints made against the prosecutrix and other women alleging that they were engaged in prostitution. Even assuming that the prosecutrix was of easy virtue, she has a right of refuse to submit herself to sexual intercourse to anyone.”
The bench affirmed the sentence of 10 years imposed on the accused by the trial court.
Full Judgment

Monday, October 29, 2018

Minor raped by father-son doc duo

A 17-year-old girl was allegedly sexually exploited several times by a 60-yearold doctor, his son, who is also a doctor, and a compounder in their clinic for over two years in Himmatnagar town of Sabarkantha district.
One more compounder of the same clinic has also been accused of molesting the minor, who did petty jobs there. The fatherson doctor duo was also accused of recordi-ng nude pictures and videos of the girl and threatening to upload them on social media.
Based on the minor’s complaint, Himmatnagar B Division police booked doctor Sikandar Rathod (60), his physician son Parvez Rathod
(35) and compounder Abdul Sattar Belim for rape under various sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) and IT Act. Another compounder Yasin Pathan, who also worked at ‘Skeen Car’ clinic run by the Rathods, was booked for molesting the minor girl.
According to the girl’s complaint registered on Sunday, the accused sexually exploited her time again for about two years since May 2016. They also recorded nude videos of the girl and threatened to upload it on social media if she disclosed about the incidents to anybody, police inspector AK Patel of B division police station in Himmatnagar said.
The girl in her complaint stated that her ordeal began in May 2016 and continued till April 2018 till she left the job.

eKYC can be used for govt schemes, UIDAI tells banks

The UIDAI has clarified to banks that Aadhaar eKYC can be used to authenticate beneficiaries of government subsidies and welfare schemes while for other customers physical Aadhaar card can be used for verification, a source said. The Aadhaar-issuing authority Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) wrote to the banks last week clarifying the instances and modes in which Aadhaar can be used, and a copy of the same was also sent to the Reserve Bank of India, a senior UIDAI official said.
The UIDAI wrote to banks after it received a legal opinion on the matter, in the wake of a recent Supreme Court verdict that restricted the use of Aadhaar by private entities but cleared it for welfare schemes.
The UIDAI informed the banks that they can use Aadhaar authentication for beneficiaries of government subsidies and welfare schemes, and listed various ‘options’ for the use of Aadhaar (such as Quick Response or QR code and offline Aadhaar) for other banking customers in the light of Supreme Court judgment in the Aadhaar case, said the official who did not wish to be named. Physical Aadhaar card can be used for verification in an offline mode if produced voluntarily, it clarified.
When contacted UIDAI CEO, said “There are viable and completely paperless and digital options available through the digitally signed electronic form of Aadhaar which allows identity to be verified online without pinging our server. And through such methods, the services can be seamlessly and digitally offered by banks for non-DBT customers”. He also confirmed that UIDAI’s views have been sent to banks but did not elaborate on details. PTI

Thursday, October 25, 2018

SC orders CVC inquiry into CBI director Alok Verma to be completed in two weeks

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered the Central Vigilance Commission inquiry into CBI director Alok Verma , who along with special director Rakesh Asthana was asked to go on leave after an internal fight between the two, to be completed in two weeks under the supervision of retired SC Judge A K Patnaik.

Calling the matter one of "national importance" that cannot brook any delay, CJI Ranjan Gogoi and justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said a retired SC judge would supervise the CVC probe "because of the importance of the case for the country and is a one time exception without casting aspersions on any constitutional or statutory authority."

The top court also asked M Nageshwar Rao, who was named interim CBI director by the central government, not to take any policy decision and do only routine job to keep the central agency functioning, essentially serving as an administrative head till the inquiry was completed.

The court ordered the Centre to give in a sealed cover the decisions taken till date by interim director Rao after being assigned the charge.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Verma challenging the central government's order to send him on leave.

Earlier on Friday, Asthana also moved the SC against the Centre's decision to send him on leave.

Following an internal fight between Verma and Asthana, the top two officers of the CBI, the government had appointed M Nageshwar Rao as interim chief of the CBI with "immediate effect" and placed the top two officers of the central agency on leave.

CA scandal: UK slaps Facebook with $645k fine

Facebook Inc was slapped with a symbolic £500,000 ($645,000) fine by the UK’s privacy regulator for “serious” violations of data protection rules that paved the way for the Cambridge Analytica (CA) scandal.
The fine is the highest possible for the Information Commissioner’s Office under old rules that predated this year’s European Union revamp of privacy penalties. The ICO said that between 2007 and 2014, “Facebook processed the personal information of users unfairly by allowing application developers access to their information without sufficiently clear and informed consent”. About the UK fine, Facebook said that they are reviewing the decision.

3 police men held in Bopal custodial death case

The special investigating team (SIT) probing the Bopal custodial death case on Thursday arrested three policemen deployed with the special operations group (SOG) and local crime branch (LCB), for the alleged killing of a 35-year-old man from Naroda, who was a suspect in a Rs 2.50 crore gold theft case.
The 35-year-old victim, Surubha Jhala, was a driver with a courier company. He was picked up by LCB and SOG personnel on October 14 and died the next day, states the FIR which books the cops for murder.
The SIT chief, deputy superintendent of police (DySP) K T Kamaria, said that all the three accused were nabbed after they gave statements to the probe team.
“We arrested SOG PSI N A Rayma, SOG head constable Mukeshsinh Daulatsinh and Sadiq Usman, a constable with LCB, in the custodial death case. Only these three persons were involved in the offence and we nabbed them after they made statements confessing the crime to us on Thursday,” said Kamaria.
About the five police personnel mentioned in the FIR, Kamaria said Jhala’s family members had misunderstood that there were five persons involved while only these three cops were involved in the crime. 

Suit For Mere Injunction Not Maintainable When Defendant Can Successfully Raise Cloud Over Plaintiff’s Title: SC

‘A suit for mere injunction does not lie only when the defendant raises a genuine dispute with regard to title and when he raises a cloud over the title of the plaintiff.’
The Supreme Court has reiterated that a suit for bare injunction would not be maintainable when a defendant could successfully raise cloud over the title of the plaintiff.
The Jharkhand State Housing Board had approached the apex court assailing the high court and trial court judgment that had decreed a suit for permanent injunction filed by one Dildar Singh. The board contended that the suit is not maintainable without seeking the relief of declaration of title as the suit schedule property was recorded in the revenue records in the name of the defendant. It was also contended that, without seeking right, title, possession and correction of entries in record of right, plaintiff cannot maintain the suit for injunction. The high court, while rejecting its appeal, had observed that as the plaintiff is in possession of the property, he can protect his possession against any interference and it is not necessary to prove his title to the property.
The bench comprising Justice N.V. Ramana and Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar observed that the board by relying upon the land acquisition proceedings and the possession certificate could successfully raise cloud over the title of the plaintiff and in those circumstances plaintiff ought to have sought for the relief of declaration and the suit for injunction simplicitor could not have been entertained.
The bench said: “It is well settled by catena of Judgments of this Court that in each and every case where the defendant disputes the title of the plaintiff it is not necessary that in all those cases plaintiff has to seek the relief of declaration. A suit for mere injunction does not lie only when the defendant raises a genuine dispute with regard to title and when he raises a cloud over the title of the plaintiff, then necessarily in those circumstances, plaintiff cannot maintain a suit for bare injunction.”
Full judgement 

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

HC: Slow learner can’t be declared ‘mentally retarded’

Merely because a student is a slow learner and not good in her studies, she cannot be declared as ‘mentally retarded’, the Bombay high court has ruled. The court came to the aid of a 32-year-old woman who had challenged her paternal aunt being appointed as the sole trustee of her late father’s will for his properties, that included a share in a flat in Churchgate. The aunt had claimed that the girl, the sole legal heir of her father’s properties, was mentally unstable citing an IQ test.
“In my view, even if a student is a slow learner or (her) school education is not satisfactory, such a person cannot be declared as mentally retarded on that ground,” said Justice Dhanuka. The court took on record the girl’s claims that she had been affected on account of her parents’ divorce. This led to her being academically weak and she even attended a special school as her intelligent quotient was low for some time.
The girl’s parents had married in 1985 and she was born a year later. The parents obtained a customary divorce in 2002, which the girl said affected her psychologically. Her father expired in 2011 and she lived with her aunt for a few months. Subsequently, her mother filed an application and was appointed as her guardian in 2012. The aunt filed a testamentary petition in the high court in 2012, seeking probate of the man’s 2009 will. She claimed that her niece was unfit to administer the properties and sought to be appointed as the main trustee. Last year, the girl filed a petition seeking a recall of the high court’s order dispensing with her consent and grant of probate in favour of her aunt.
Justice Ramesh Dhanuka recalled a 2014 order of the high court appointing the aunt as the trustee of the properties and executor of her brother’s will. The court further imposed Rs 1 lakh as legal costs that the aunt, who had stopped paying monthly maintenance for the girl’s expenses, will have to shell out to her niece.
The court came to the aid of a 32-year-old woman, whose aunt had claimed that the girl, the sole legal heir of her father’s properties, was mentally unstable citing an IQ test

Third child’s birth will disqualify panchayat poll candidate, says SC

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that birth of a third child would automatically disqualify a person from contesting panchayat polls and from holding the post of a member or sarpanch in a panchayat.

Scotching attempts by a tribal sarpanch in Odisha to step around the disqualification law by giving away one of his three children in adoption to comply with the two-child norm, a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said the legislative intent in Panchayati Raj Act was to bar any person having three ‘live births’ in her/his family from contesting panchayat elections or holding posts in panchayats.
“The legislative intent is to restrict the number of births in a family and not on the basis of benefit available under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act in regulating the number of children by giving the excess children in adoption,” the CJI-led bench said.
The petitioner, Minasingh Majhi, had challenged an Orissa high court decision to disqualify him from holding the sarpanch’s post in a panchayat in Nuapada district after the birth of his third child. Two children were born to him and his wife in 1995 and 1998. He was elected sarpanch in February 2002, but the birth of the third child in August 2002 led to his disqualification from the post.
His counsel Puneet Jain argued that he had given the firstborn in adoption in September 1999 and as Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act provides that once a child is given in adoption, that child ceases to be a member of the original family, his client remained compliant with the two child norm to hold the post of sarpanch.
Jain argued that though Majhi was the biological father of three children, legally he had two children as the firstborn was given away in adoption to another family and, hence, he was compliant with the norm set by the Odisha Gram Panchayat Raj Act.
The top court bench said, “We do not know whether the law intended to make panchayat members and sarpanchs the role model for entire India by fastening the two-child norm on them. But the legislative intent appears clear that it wanted to put a cap on the number of children at two for those holding elected posts in panchayats.”
Jain argued that twins and triplets were born to persons and asked whether they should be disqualified from contesting panchayat elections or holding elected posts in the grassroots level democratic institution? The bench said the situation did not apply to the case in hand and clarified that birth of twins and triplets was a rare phenomenon and the court would take an appropriate decision when such a case was brought before it.

An SC bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said the legislative intent in Panchayati Raj Act was to bar any person having three ‘live births’ in his family from contesting panchayat elections or holding any post

Play grounds mandatory for new schools

Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board (GSHSEB) has amended its rules for approving new secondary and higher secondary schools. According to the new rules, it is compulsory for schools to have a playground. School management, however, have protested the board’s decision, terming it illogical.
Representatives of Gujarat State School Management Association (GSSMA) wrote to the state education board, raising concerns over the issue. The letter states, “According to the Secondary and Higher Secondary Education (SHSE) Act, there is no compulsion for the school to own a playground space. It could be land taken on rent or lease by the school management.”
“The requirement for a 1,200-square-yard playground for schools in urban areas and a 2,000-square-yard one in rural areas was mandatory only as per the old rules of the SHSE Act. At a time when land costs are so high, it is virtually impossible for schools to get such a huge piece of land,” the letter states.
The association also raised concerns at the fact that approval for appointments of physical training (PT) teachers at grant-in-aid schools has been pending since September 2009 and that the number of students opting for PT as an elective subject in class X is going down.
Bhaskar Patel, president of the association, said, “The board’s decision is not practical. It will put a financial burden on institutions.”
Sources said that the government must also take into account the financial position of schools while introducing such rules, especially when the state education board has imposed a cap on the fees schools can charge by setting up a fee regulation committee.

‘FIR not a must to presume death’

HC Paves Way To Sell Property Of Man Missing Since 1970

In an important order, Gujarat high court has ruled that a person continually absent from home for seven years and unheard of by his family, friends or acquaintances can be presumed to be dead.
The court said that the missing person’s family is not required to either lodge an FIR or to inform any authority upon a person going missing, for the law does not lay down any procedure for declaring a person presumed dead. There is no requirement of the police investigation to trace the missing person or police record to raise the presumption. In such cases, the burden of proof lies on the person who insists that the missing person is still alive.
With this observation, the high court on Tuesday held a person, who had gone missing in 1970, presumed dead and paved way for his family members to sell a joint family property in Maninagar, which has remained unsold for decades because the person did not return for 38 long years after leaving home.
The case involves a bungalow ‘Dhruv Nivas’ in Maninagar area. In 1970, 22-year-old Arvind Dhruv left home and has not returned till date. The family members did not inquire into his whereabouts since he was a wanderer who used to get irritated upon being asked about his location.
As decades passed, the family planned to sell the property, a 352-sq m bungalow. It faced problems in transferring the property because Dhruv was a natural heir. In 1994, his father issued an advertisement stating that Dhruv had nothing to do with the family property since he was missing. This did not solve the issue.
After waiting for more than a decade, Dhruv’s family moved a civil court in 2012 for the declaration that he should be presumed dead and the family is allowed to sell the property. The civil court last year rejected their suit saying that Dhruv could not be presumed dead because the family had not registered an FIR and there was no police investigation.
When the order was challenged in the HC, Justice J B Pardiwala observed that the Indian Evidence Act does not provide any procedure to declare a person presumed dead, except the condition of his continuous absence for seven years be satisfied. The court said, “Where a person is continually absent from home for a period of seven years unheard of by persons known other than his own family members, who would have naturally received intelligence from him, he is presumed to be dead. The burden of proving that he is alive thereafter is shifted to the person, who affirms that he is not dead. It is a rebuttable presumption.”
In Dhruv’s case, the judge said that if Dhruv was alive after 1970, there was no reason for him not to contact his immediate family. “The fact that he has not contacted his family members at all since 1970 makes me, as a man of ordinary prudence, believe that Arvindbhai must have died in 1970 or soon thereafter,” the court said.

SC: No BS-IV cars after April 2020

SC bans the sale of BS-IV vehicles from April 2020

The Supreme Court ruled on 24 Oct 2018 that the manufacture and sale of BS-IV vehicles will not be allowed after BS-VI norms are introduced from April 1, 2020, to curb pollution. The court turned down a plea of the Centre and auto firms for a six-month window to sell their existing stock. The court asked the auto industry to show the “will, responsibility and urgency” to adopt BS-VI fuels. The SC said there is sufficient time for the manufacturers to change over to the new system and, there is no reason why they should be given a window of three or six months for sale of accumulated vehicles.

The court turned down a plea of the Centre and automobile companies for a six-month window to sell their existing stock of vehicles.
A bench of Justices Madan B Lokur, S Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta said in case of a conflict between health and wealth, health will have to be given precedence and asked the auto industry to show the “will, responsibility and urgency” to adopt the cleaner BS VI fuels to protect the health of citizens. “When we are concerned with the health of the entire citizenry, the larger public interest has to outweigh the much smaller pecuniary interest of the industry, in this case, the automobile industry,” Justice Gupta said

Strict Proof Of Marriage Not Needed For ‘Maintenance’ Proceedings Under Sec. 125 CrPC, Reiterates SC

‘The High Court did not keep in view that in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, strict proof of marriage is not necessary.’
The Supreme Court, while setting aside a Karnataka High Court order that had dismissed a maintenance petition for want of proof of marriage, has reiterated that in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, such strict proof of marriage is not necessary.
In this case (Kamala vs. MR Mohan Kumar), the Family court had observed that there was a husband-wife relationship between the parties and children are born out of the said wedlock. It had then directed the ‘husband’ to pay maintenance. In revision petition filed by the ‘husband’, the high court held that the petitioner did not produce any evidence to show that the marriage was solemnized as per custom and she, not being the legally wedded wife, is not entitled for any maintenance.
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Indira Banerjee, referring to the evidence on record, said the oral evidence given by the ‘wife’ coupled with documents raise a strong presumption of a valid marriage. Referring to testimonies of other witnesses, it said that it is established that the parties cohabitated as husband and wife and that the people around them treated them as husband and wife.
The bench said that, unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, such strict standard of proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy. Quoting from the apex court judgment in Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha, the bench said a broad and extensive interpretation should be given to the term “wife” under Section 125 CrPC. In the said judgment, it was observed: “We are of the opinion that a broad and expansive interpretation should be given to the term “wife” to include even those cases where a man and woman have been living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period of time, and strict proof of marriage should not be a precondition for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, so as to fulfil the true spirit and essence of the beneficial provision of maintenance under Section 125. We also believe that such an interpretation would be a just application of the principles enshrined in the Preamble to our Constitution, namely, social justice and upholding the dignity of the individual.”
Restoring the Family court order granting maintenance, the bench said when the Family court held that there was a valid marriage, the high court, being the revisional court, has no power to reassess the evidence and substitute its views on findings of fact.
Full Judgement 

PM Modi conferred with Seoul Peace Prize

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been conferred with the Seoul Peace Prize for 2018 for his contribution to international cooperation and fostering global economic growth.

The Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement Wednesday that Modi expressed his gratitude for the prestigious honour and in the light of India' deepening partnership with the Republic of Korea, he has accepted the award.

"The world acknowledges. PM Narendra Modi awarded prestigious Seoul Peace Prize 2018 for contribution to high economic growth in India and world through 'Modinomics', contribution to world peace, improving human development & furthering democracy in India," MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar tweeted.

The ministry said the award will be presented to Modi by the Seoul Peace Prize Foundation at a mutually convenient time.

The Seoul Peace Prize was established in 1990 to commemorate the success of the 24th Olympic Games held in Seoul. The award was established to crystalise Korean people's yearning for peace on the Korean peninsula and in the rest of the world.

While conferring the award on Modi, the award committee recognised his contribution to the growth of Indian and global economies, crediting 'Modinomics' for reducing social and economic disparity between the rich and the poor, the MEA said.

The committee lauded Modi's initiatives to make the government cleaner through anti-corruption measures and demonetisation, it said.

The committee also credited him for his contribution toward reginal and global peace through a proactive policy with countries around the world under the 'Modi doctrine' and the act east policy, it said.

He is the 14th recepient of the award and the past laureates included former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and renowned international relief organizations like Doctors Without Borders and Oxfam.PTI