Lamborghini Huracán LP 610-4 t
Home
Practically two a long time just before this, in 1808, Supreme Court Lawyer on returning to Chandigarh following browsing his estates had involuntarily discovered himself in a foremost placement among the Chandigarh Supreme Court Lawyers .

Most Famous Advocates in Supreme Court of India - Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu +919876616815 -.

The entry " defence " dealt only with the armed forces whether on land or sea or in the air and the raising or maintenance of such forces and their operations. On the other hand, if he is satisfied after hearing the witnesses for the defence that there are not sufficient grounds for committing the accused, he may cancel the charge and discharge the accused. It is a guaranteed right of the person detained to have the very grounds which are the basis of the order of detention.

The exemption notification dated 31. In view of the afore discussion, we allow the appeals, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Allahabad, and dismiss the writ petition filed by the Builder " respondent No. 213 which lays down that if the accused has refused to give a list as required by s. The whole purpose of furnishing a detained person with the grounds is to enable him to make a representation refuting these grounds and of proving his innocence.

The Ordinance was not legislation with respect to defence and was within the legislative competence of the Ruler. The respective arguments though have been elaborate the point urged is brief. If that be so, according to Shri Datar, sub- section 2(b) of Section 24-AA would only include foreign companies with whom the ONGC has no direct agreement though such foreign companies may nevertheless be providing similar services, may be, on the strength of separate agreements with the foreign companies with whom the ONGC has executed an agreement as contemplated in Sub-section 2(a) of Section 24-AA of the Surtax Act.

In pith and substance the Ordinance was a law relating to public order, criminal law and procedure and not defence. 211 or if he has given one and the witnesses, if any, included therein whom the Magistrate desires to examine, have been summoned and examined under s. Acts subsequent to the achieving of the object of conspiracy may tend to prove that a particular accused was party to the conspiracy. 243 of 1940, were not in accordance with law for the following reasons: (1) The order dated April 9, 1943, annulling the assignment of the decree by Venkatachalam Chettiar in favour of his mother, Meenakshi Achi, related back to the date of the transfer, i.

Thus, the alleged disclosure/confessional statement (Mark A) made by Jaibir in another case would be of no consequence. 212 the Magistrate may make an order committing the accused for trial by the High Court or the 744 Court of Session and shall also briefly record the reasons for such commitment. This Court would be entitled to examine the matter and to see whether the grounds furnished are the grounds on the basis of which he has been detained or they contain some other vague or irrelevant material.

Learned Counsel for the appellants contended that the execution petitions, E. Once the object of conspiracy has been achieved, any subsequent act, which may be unlawful, would not make the accused a part of the conspiracy like giving shelter to an absconder. Section 14 creates a substantive offence if the grounds are disclosed and it also lays a duty on the Court not to permit the disclosure of such grounds. It is further argued by the learned senior counsel that regardless of the fact whether the agreement brings about association or participation of the Central Government or the authorized person in such business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils or such agreement results in rendering of service, so long as the rendering of such service is directly associated with the business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils, Sub-section 2(a) of Section 24-AA of the Surtax Act must be understood to include even such foreign companies with whom the ONGC had executed agreements to provide such services or to make available plant or machinery.

It virtually amounts to a suspension of a guaranteed right provided by the Constitution inasmuch as it indirectly by a stringent provision makes administration of the law by this Court impossible and at the same (1) [1950] INSC 14; [1950] S. 54 of the Act; (3) when the transfer was annulled the property vested in the Official Receiver who could administer it in the interest of the creditors ; and (4) even after annulment the transfer stood as between the transferor and the transferee and the transferee was entitled to the balance of the sale proceeds remaining after satisfying the creditors.

Shri Datar would contend that as the exemption notification contains/uses the same language as found in sub-section 2(a) of Section 24- AA of the Surtax Act its applicability should be understood with reference to the existence of agreement with the foreign companies rather than the immediate purpose of such agreement, namely, involvement of the Central Government or the authorized person in the business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils.

(i) A transfer by a debtor before insolvency with a view to give fraudulent preference conveyed a valid title to the transferee; (2) such a transfer was voidable against the Official Receiver in circumstances mentioned in s. 1 " with costs quantified at Rs. In order that this Court may be able to safeguard this fundamental right and to grant him relief it is absolutely essential that the detenu is not prohibited under penalty of punishment to disclose the grounds to the Court and no injunction by law can be issued to this Court disabling it from having a look at the grounds.

The Ordinance dealt in the main with certain acts done with the intent to aid the enemy though indirectly it was concerned with the operations of the armed forces. " This Court would be disabled from exercising its functions under article 32 and adjudicating on the point that the grounds given satisfy the requirements of the sub-clause if it is not open to it to see the grounds that have been furnished. 1983 must be understood in the above light, it is argued.

5 lakhs to be paid to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, within a period of six weeks from today. , February 3, 1936, and, therefore, E.
Back to posts
This post has no comments - be the first one!

UNDER MAINTENANCE