Daily Legal News 05.09.2008

Suggestion to bring all Govt bodies under CAT jurisdiction
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/PoliticsNation/Govt_bodies_to_be_brought_under_CAT/articleshow/3325577.cms
NEW DELHI: The All India Conference of the CAT has proposed that all institutions and authorities, owned or controlled by the Government, be brought under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The Conference has also taken a decision regarding issuance of a general notification for bringing all such government bodies under the Tribunal's jurisdiction as it was felt that it was self-sufficient to deal with service matters of any kind. The decision regarding issuance of a general notification under the Administrative Tribunals Act for the purpose was also taken after deliberations at the Conference held on Sunday. Many other measures for improving the service conditions of the Chairman and members of the CAT were recommended to make functioning of the institution smooth and effective. Earlier at the Conference's inaugural function on Saturday, Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan welcomed the initiatives in the field of service jurisprudence, including the CAT experiment. "It is in the interest of state to address the grievances of the employees so that they can effectively serve the general populace," he had said. The CJI had also cautioned against the government's tendency to challenge CAT's orders in courts. "The problem is a large number of CAT decisions are challenged in courts. This is not a good thing," he said. "They (government officials) should feel these are specialised tribunals and they should end the litigation in the tribunals," the CJI had said.
4 Aug, 2008, 1921 hrs IST, PTI
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

Bandh case: Tripathy tenders unconditional apology in court
http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/05/stories/2008080555980100.htm
Apology in response to contempt notice
Chief Minister adopts same stand as Chief Secretary
NEW DELHI: Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary L.K. Tripathy while maintaining that the State government had not violated the Supreme Court’s order banning the bandh on October 1, 2007 on the Sethusamudram issue has tendered an unconditional apology if the court was of the view that the order had not been effectively implemented.
The Chief Secretary stated this in his affidavit filed in the Supreme Court in response to the contempt notice issued on the AIADMK’s petition alleging that the order had been violated. Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi did not file a separate affidavit but the State counsel told the court on Monday that the Chief Minister was adopting the stand of the Chief Secretary. The then DGP, Rajendran, filed a similar affidavit tendering an unconditional apology.
Mr. Tripathy said “this contemnor has got the highest regard and respect and obedience for the orders of this court and has not violated or intended to violate any of the orders passed by this court.” He said if the court was of the view that the order had not been effectively implemented, “it was not wilful and this first contemnor tenders his unconditional apology for the same and the court may be pleased to purge this contemnor from the contempt proceedings.”
Mr. Tripathy said the government received the court’s order at 10.30 pm on September 30, 2007 and instructions were issued over phone to the District Collectors regarding the measures to be taken for maintenance of law and order and public tranquillity and sustaining normalcy. He said that in view of the various steps taken, barring certain stray instances, no major act of violence or incident detrimental to law and order had been reported and the routine life of people passed off without any disturbance.
He said following the interim orders of the Supreme Court, the Democratic Progressive Alliance in the State decided to observe a fast on October 1, 2007. Hence, the contention of the petitioner that the State machinery did not take any action to ensure normalcy was not correct. The allegation that buses did not ply was incorrect, as buses were operated on 2,749 routes. Due to the visible presence of police, there were no complaints of obstructions of public transport and closure of shops and establishments. Seeking dismissal of the contempt petition, he said train services were maintained without any disruption and denied the petitioner’s allegation that the Supreme Court order was not enforced. Earlier, a Bench of Justice B.N. Agrawal and G.S. Singhvi directed the Chief Minister, the Chief Secretary and the DGP to file written explanation as to why there was an inordinate delay in filing a response to the contempt notice issued by the court. Justice Agrawal orally told counsel: “It is almost a year and by now the matter could have been disposed of. Your Chief Minister and Union Minister have no time to file replies to the show cause. You are above the law! What type of people are you?”
Referring to Mr. Baalu, Justice Agrawal said: “Because you are in the Central government, do you think that you will do everything but you will not file your reply? You think you can dictate to this court also. If this is their [contemnors’] attitude we will issue warrant of arrest and let them come and appear in the court.”
Tuesday, Aug 05, 2008
J. Venkatesan
www.hindu.com

Supreme Court stays HC order on SMS on J and K http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/0E9CBE1B8D0ABAA56525749C003EA1F5?OpenDocument
New Delhi, Aug 5 (PTI) The Supreme Court today stayed the Jammu and Kashmir High Court's order lifting the ban on SMS services which allegedly were aggravating the violence by spreading the rumours during the on-going protest on Amarnath land transfer row.A Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan also stayed the High Court direction asking the district administration to treat press identity cards issued to media persons as curfew passes to enable them to perform their professional duties.The state government had imposed a ban on the SMS services on Sunday on the ground it was being used to whip up communal tension through rumours.
PTI
www.ptinews.com

Doctors, experts seek changes to abortion law
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Doctors-experts-seek-changes-to-abortion-law/344858/
Mumbai, August 04 ...say Niketa case shows present cut-off is based on outdated technology
The Bombay High Court order today rejecting a city couple’s petition to abort pregnancy in the 26th week as the foetus had a complete heart blockage has reignited the debate among doctors about allowing medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) after the 20th week.
The HC refused to give permission to 31-year-old first-time mother Niketa Mehta who wanted to terminate her pregnancy, in a case torn between trauma and ethical issues. Mehta was told in the 24th week of her pregnancy that her foetus had complete heart block and would require a pacemaker to pull through life. But the MTP Act does not allow termination after 20 weeks.
Niketa appealed to the court to make an exception in her case, saying that since medical advances allow detection of congenital health problems in unborn children, shouldn’t the law keep up and allow termination of pregnancy?
Now that the HC has rejected her appeal, the Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Society of India (FOGSI) wants to increase the cut-off time to 26 weeks as in the United States and Britain and also wants a degree of flexibility in the time limit. This is the second attempt by the group to get the cut-off limit raised after the 2002 amendment of the MTP Act.
“I am a little disappointed, because ultimately it is the woman’s right to choose. However taking this case, the High Court could have given directives to draft fresh guidelines,” said Dr Jaydeep Tank, MTP committee chairperson at FOGSI.
“The PCPNDT act was passed when a PIL was filed and when action was demanded by the court. Today, the act is working in a regressive manner. This matter was important enough for the judiciary to look beyond legislation,” he said.
“I honestly feel justice would have only been served if termination was allowed. According to the report submitted by the expert committee, both paediatrics as well as cardiologists, all suggested termination,” he added.
Adds Dr Duru Shah, former president of FOGSI: “It is only the team from JJ hospital which said that there is no need for termination. As of now, the law does not permit termination after 20 weeks unless there is a risk to the mother’s health. But the fact is that certain condition cannot be picked up at 20 weeks. Congenital heart problems surface only after 22 to 24 weeks on foetal echocardiography. The law was made to cut down on sex selection, but sex of the child can be detected by the 16th or 17th week.”
According to Dr Snehal Kulkarni, chief paediatric cardiologist at Wockhardt Hospital and also a member of the committee set up to detect the exact heart condition of the foetus and how it would translate over the long term, “The mother had undergone a couple of foetal echocardiography tests, the foetus had corrective transposition of great vassals with complete heart blockage. The heart beat was 40 per minute whereas normal foetal heart beat is 160 per minute, this is significantly less.”
“Implanting pacemakers in a newborn is not new but has its own risk. Also, due to the abnormal heart structure, the quality of life of the child will not be so good. Again, once the baby grows, the pacemaker will have to be changed every two to three years initially and then every five years,” added Dr Kulkarni. The pacemaker costs Rs 1 lakh, besides surgery charges and hospitalisation.
“I believe the apprehension is that if one allows abortion beyond the stipulated time, it will abuse the current law. MTP Act is a terrific act, the best abortion law in the world, but it needs to be updated. The current act is based on the technology used in 1971. With newer techniques, the law should be amended,” said Dr Tank.
Experts say“Ultimately it is the woman’s right to choose. The HC could have given directives to draft fresh guidelines”
Dr Jaydeep Tank, MTP committee chairperson, Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI)
“The fact is that certain condition cannot be picked up at 20 weeks. Congenital heart problems surface only after 22 to 24 weeks on pregnancy”
Dr Duru Shah, former president, FOGSI
“Implanting pacemaker on a newborn is nothing new, but involves its own risks. As the baby grows, pacemaker will have to be changed every two to three years initially and then every five years” Snehal Kulkarni, chief paediatric cardiologist, Wockhardt Hospital
Jinal Shah
Posted online: Tuesday , August 05, 2008 at 03:02:17Updated: Tuesday , August 05, 2008 at 03:02:17
www.expressindia.com

Justice delayed for Indian fire victims http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indians_Abroad/Justice_delayed_for_Indian_fire_victims/articleshow/3325776.cms
DUBAI: For over a year now, the Indian embassy in Bahrain has been awaiting a court judgement on a compensation claim it had filed for the death of 16 Indian workers in a fire that broke out in a labour accommodation camp in that country two years ago. "We are keenly following the case and are awaiting the judgement on the compensation claim for a total of 1.6 million Bahraini dinars ($4.2 million) we had filed for the 16 Indian workers who had died in the fire," India's Ambassador to Bahrain Balkrishna Shetty told reporters from Manama. The 16 Indian workers had died, while 200 others were injured, when the fire broke out at a three-storey building that served as a labour accommodation camp in a residential area in Qudabia in 2006. An Asian supervisor of the company, which employed the workers, was later sentenced by a Bahraini court to two years in jail for the deaths and violation of the country's labour ministry accommodation regulations while charges against the owner of the company as well as another Asian supervisor were dropped. Subsequently, the Indian mission filed the compensation claim of BD1.6 million - BD100,000 ($265,217) for each worker - July 29 last year, saying that the company should also be held responsible. "Until and unless the representative of the company is held guilty, the issue of compensation cannot be taken up," the ambassador said. "We are awaiting a judgement on our appeal," he added. According to Shetty, the case should serve as an example for other companies in that Gulf nation. "We also believe that this case will be an example to others so that workers are accommodated in safe conditions," he said. Earlier, speaking to the local media, the ambassador said: "We demand BD100, 000 for each victim as they were forced to live in an unsafe and overcrowded place. They were not provided with a proper kitchen so they were left with no option but to cook their food inside their room." Stating that the compensation claim was within he legal framework, he said: "We respect the government of Bahrain and are certain of the impartiality of its judicial system". Meanwhile, a fund was set up with the help of the Indian Community Relief Fund and Indian businessmen both in Bahrain and India, which is supporting the families of the victims. But the compensation will uphold the legal rights of the families, according to the ambassador. Bahrain is home to around 290,000 expatriate Indians and a large number of them work as contract labourers in the country's booming construction industry.
4 Aug 2008, 2101 hrs IST,IANS
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

HC reserves judgment on percentile
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1181630
The Bombay High Court on Monday reserved its judgment in the PIL challenging the percentile system introduced this year for junior college admissions.
Chief justice Swatanter Kumar and justice AP Deshpande, who heard the arguments over three weeks, gave no indication regarding when the judgment will be pronounced. Though junior college admissions are almost complete and classes have already begun, anxiety prevails as the HC had earlier directed that admissions would be subject to final orders in the case.
Wrapping up the arguments in the case, senior counsel Rajni Iyer, who represented the ICSE schools in Maharashtra, on Monday, filed affidavits of two ICSE students who had failed to secure admission to a college of their choice despite scoring high marks. In one instance, while an ICSE student, who had scored 90.14 %, did not get admission in the science stream at DG Ruparel College while an SSC student with 89.53 got a seat owing to the percentile system. Similarly, at HR College, an ICSE student with 85% did not get admission while an SSC student with same marks made the cut off.
It is this “artificial enhancement of the marks of SSC students” owing to the percentile or marks equalisation system that the petitioner, Fransisco Louis, has challenged as discriminatory and arbitrary.
Government lawyer Jyoti Pawar said the government had already taken a decision to allow colleges to increase their intake capacity by 10% to ensure that all students get admission. She said that in South Mumbai colleges, 1234 seats were still vacant in the Arts stream, 247 seats in the Science stream and 390 in the Commerce stream. But elite colleges like St Xaviers, Jai Hind and HR did not have any vacancies. In the rest of Maharashtra, 97,239 seats remain vacant.
Anshika Misra
Tuesday, August 05, 2008 04:18 IST
www.dnaindia.com

Terror threat to SC, security tightened
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080060029&ch=8/4/2008%204:15:00%20PM
Security measures were beefed up in and around the Supreme Court and Patiala House district court in New Delhi area on Monday after an advocate received a letter threatening of bomb explosions in the court premises.The letter was sent to advocate Subhash Gulati, who further passed it to court authorities and officials of Delhi Police. The letter claimed that there would be bomb explosions in the Supreme Court and Patiala House Courts Tuesday.The police immediately swung into action and carried out intensive searches. Security measures were also beefed up to prevent any untoward incident."It could be another fake terror threat. But we are not taking it lightly and adequate measures are being taken," said a senior Delhi Police official.In wake of the threat, visitors were allowed entry only after a thorough frisking and lawyers were also asked to cooperate with security personnel in security checks. After the serial blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad in which over 50 people were killed last month, Delhi Police have received at least 10 fake terror threats.
Indo-Asian News Service
Monday, August 04, 2008, (New Delhi)
www.ndtv.com

ECR land deal: SC orders interim status quo
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chennai/ECR_land_deal_SC_orders_interim_status_quo/articleshow/3322901.cms
Chennai:
Three days after the Tamil Nadu government won back possession of over 3,600 acres of land between East Coast Road (ECR) and Old Mahabalipuram (OMR), worth over Rs 7,000 crore, the Supreme Court has passed an interim order in favour of the private company. "Status quo as on today shall be maintained till August 4," said a bench comprising Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan , justice Dalveer Bhandari and justice Harjir Singh Bedi, on July 25. The bench passed the order after counsel for Shree Maruthi Marine Industries Limited mentioned the matter, challenging the July 22 order of a division bench of the high court. The matter pertains to 3,611.99 acres of land leased to the company for 25 years, for manufacture of industrial grade salt. The vast tract of land, lying between the ECR and the OMR was part of the area identified for the administrative city project by former CM Jayalalithaa. The land was leased out in 1974 for a period of 25 years. Even before expiry of the lease, the company approached the government for renewal for another 20 years. In July 2007, the government rejected the plea and said it wanted the land back for the development of the information technology sector and the extension of the metropolitan city. On July 22, a division bench comprising justice K Raviraja Pandian and justice PPS Janarthana Raja dismissed the company's writ petition and appeal against the government decision, and said the government was not duty-bound to renew the lease. The Supreme Court has posted the special leave petition of the company to August 4 for further proceedings.
4 Aug 2008, 0731 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

SC permits listing of petition against CPI(M)
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/002200808041862.htm
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday said the petition seeking a CBI inquiry into the assets allegedly amassed by the CPI(M) and its leaders during the last 30 years would come up for hearing in the routine course.
"It (petition) will come up for hearing in the routine course," a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan said when advocate Jaydeep Mukherjee, who has filed the petition, mentioned before it that the defect in it has been cured and a direction be given to the registry for fixing the date of hearing.
The PIL filed by Mukherjee, General Secretary of a Kolkata-based NGO All India Legal Aid Forum, alleged that the party has assets all over the country which are worth around Rs 200 crores.
Seeking a probe by CBI or any independent agency, the petitioner alleged that 10 MPs of the party have amassed wealth more than their known sources of income.
The petitioner has also named CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat as one of the party leaders against whom investigation should be conducted.
Monday, August 4, 2008
www.hindu.com

SC threatens to issue arrest warrant against Karunanidhi
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/002200808041865.htm
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday threatened arrest warrants against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi and Union Minister T R Baalu on the Sethusamudram bandh row, terming their belated compliance of its directive as "detestable".
"You are not above everything. The Chief Minister is not above the law," a Bench of Justices B N Aggrawal and G S Singhvi, observed while slamming the Tamil Nadu Government for its attitude on the contempt petition relating to the State sponsored bandh on the Sethusamudram project on October 1, 2007.
The judges took strong exception to the Chief Minister and the Union Minister delaying their replies to the contempt notices issued by about four months.
"If this is your attitude, then let the Chief Minister and others appear. We will issue warrants of arrest. This is detestable," the judges said while asking whether "something like this should happen in the court?"
The apex court on a contempt petition of the AIADMK chief Jayalalithaa in October last year issued notices to the Chief Minister, Baalu and four others for going ahead with the October 1 bandh despite the bench restraining them.
At that time, the apex court had also threatened to recommend to the President for dismissal of the Karunanidhi government.
Monday, August 4, 2008
www.hindu.com

SC asks SAT to hear pleas, imposes cost on cosNew Delhi:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/SC_asks_SAT_to_hear_pleas_imposes_cost_on_cos/articleshow/3325619.cms
The Supreme Court on Monday asked Securities Appellate Tribunal to hear the appeals of various companies on which market regulator SEBI had imposed fine of Rs 1 crore each for withholding information in alleged price rigging of the shares of Shonkh Technologies. A bench headed by Justice Tarun Chatterjee while imposing costs of Rs 1 lakh and above on each company asked SAT, which had earlier dismissed the pleas on ground of delay, to hear the appeals on merit. Firms such as Noted Infotech, Spectrum Com, DKG Buildcon, Zodiac.com Solutions and R C Gupta & Co had challenged SEBI's direction imposing a penalty of Rs 1 crore each for not complying with its summons, thus withholding information during investigation. SEBI, which was investigating into the alleged price rigging and market manipulation of the scrip of Shonkh Technologies, had sought information from these companies. However, the appellants did not comply with the summons and had allegedly withheld information, SEBI counsel Anip Sachthey said. Senior counsel C A Sundaram, appearing for the companies, had argued that the penalty of Rs 1 crore was harsh and burdensome. It also violated Section 15J of SEBI Act 1992 which envisages the penalty must be calculated on the basis of disproportionate gain as a result of default, he said. The maximum penalty which could be imposed as per the law was Rs 1.50 lakh, he added. SEBI said the penalty was imposed keeping in view their conduct in withholding information on manipulations of scrips of Shonkh Technologies.
4 Aug, 2008, 1952 hrs IST, PTI
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

Boston death case: Tata moves court http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Boston_death_case_Tata_moves_court/articleshow/3322351.cms
MUMBAI: A legal battle waged by a man after his son's death has led to Ratan Tata, chairperson of Tata Industries, knocking on the doors of the Bombay High Court to get his name removed from the lawsuit. The court is expected to decide on Tata's plea today. When he was 26 years old in 2000, Randeep Ghosh, an employee of Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), died allegedly in a road accident while on deputation in Boston, USA. In 2004, his father, then 65 years old, sued TCS and Ratan Tata seeking damages worth Rs 30 lakh. He initially wanted to sue for Rs 7.5 crore. Dileep Ghosh, the father, said he wants to ascertain the true cause of the death as no autopsy was carried out and no criminal complaint was lodged against the driver of the vehicle that hit his son. Now, eight years after the unnatural death, Tata has moved the High Court saying that the suit against him is "misconceived" with there clearly being no cause to call for action against him, either in his personal capacity or as chairperson of Tata Industries. The plea says that Tata's name has been wrongly impleaded only because Ghosh was employed by TCS, an erstwhile division of Tata Sons Ltd. The lawsuit refers to him as chairperson of Tata Industries, which "is a separate and distinct company", Tata's plea says. The lawsuit does not show how he is responsible for payment of compensation, it says. Tata's application, filed through a constituted attorney, says that it has not been set out as to how Ratan Tata is responsible "directly or vicariously for the untimely and tragic death of Randeep Ghosh, as alleged". Darius Khambata, senior counsel representing Tata, said Tata could not be held vicariously liable for each and every employee. Tata even sought costs to be imposed on Ghosh as otherwise he "would be unnecessarily burdened with the responsibility of defending himself in the suit". Anita Castellino and Ramson Dias, advocates for Ghosh, had said in reply that Tata was a man of stature and could have used his good offices to help launch a proper investigation into the facts leading to the death in a foreign country. Ghosh has also said that Randeep was his only hope and sole earning member of the family as his other son suffers from night blindness. The family has not got over the loss, especially since Randeep had only been in the US for a little over a month when he died.
4 Aug 2008, 0235 hrs IST, Swati Deshpande,TNN http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

There is a limit to jurisdiction http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE920080802145737&Page=9&Title=Chennai&Topic=0
CHENNAI: Within the circumspect nature of jurisdiction of a writ court, finding about the nature of the property right should not be arrived at, nor any finding about the parties committing criminal trespass should be ventured, the Madras High Court has ruled.Such questions should be left to be decided by the appropriate forum created under the law, the First Bench comprising Chief Justice A K Ganguly and Justice F M Ibrahim Kalifulla observed, while passing orders on a writ appeal.Originally, while passing orders on a writ petition, a single judge had directed the police to provide protection to the petitioners and permitted them to put up a compound wall on the disputed property measuring 4.32 acre in Vadanemili village. The judge also observed that the opposite party did not have any semblance of right over the property in question, but was trying to cause hindrance to the peacefull possession of the property by the petitioners, who prima facie appear to be in possession of the land as seen from the documents produced in court. Therefore, if the police protection sought for by the petitioners was not granted, the land grabbers would take an upper hand, commit criminal trespass and cause irreparable injury to the law abiding citizens like the petitioners, the judge had held.Affected, Pushparaj filed the present appeal challenging the orders of the single judge. Passing orders, the bench observed: “We cannot uphold the orders passed by the single judge of the writ court. We are told that there are civil suits pending between the parties and there is a civil court decree obtained by the father of the petitioner’s vendor. The petitioners should take recourse to the civil proceedings for execution of the said decree." Citing a Supreme Court decision, the bench held that the order of the single judge could not be sustained and directed the parties to work out their remedies before the civil court
Sunday August 3 2008 01:19 IST
T S Sekaran ENS
www.newindpress.com

Terror threat to Supreme Court, security tightened
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=&id=aeecfda7-b815-45f4-8612-0616505f6506&&Headline=Terror+threat+to+SC%2c+security+tightened&strParent=strParentID
Security measures were beefed up in and around the Supreme Court and Patiala House district court in New Delhi area on Monday after an advocate received a letter threatening of bomb explosions in the court premises.
The letter was sent to advocate Subhash Gulati, who further passed it to court authorities and officials of Delhi Police. The letter claimed that there would be bomb explosions in the Supreme Court and Patiala House Courts on Tuesday.
The police immediately swung into action and carried out intensive searches. Security measures were also beefed up to prevent any untoward incident.
“It could be another fake terror threat. But we are not taking it lightly and adequate measures are being taken,” said a senior Delhi Police official.
In wake of the threat, visitors were allowed entry only after a thorough frisking and lawyers were also asked to cooperate with security personnel in security checks.
After the serial blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad in which over 50 people were killed last month, Delhi Police have received at least 10 fake terror threats.
Indo-Asian News Service
New Delhi, August 04, 2008
First Published: 15:26 IST(4/8/2008)
www.hindustantimes.com

HC seeks explanation from authorities on illegal bullfights http://www.indlawnews.com/newsdisplay.aspx?bd8ea766-ea45-4622-ab13-d5f0e1de6a20
Taking cognizance of reports of illegal bullfights in South Goa suo motu Panjim bench of Bombay High Court has issued notices to the authorities seeking explanation as to what action was being taken against the organizers.The bench had treated a media report on the illegal activity as a writ petition and served notices on the Director of Panchayat and deputy superintendent of police.The court had also directed the Benaulim panchayat sarpanch as to why it was allowing bullfights.It might be recalled that bullfights had been banned in the country under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960.But it had become a regular practice in Goa, particularly South Goa where high betting was encouraged to provide entertainment. Interestingly, Francisco Sardinha, who had been recently elected member of parliament from South Goa, vowed to introduce a private members bill in Lok Sabha allowing bullfights. He openly said it was his utmost priority as bullfights provide entertainment to people in an international tourist destination like Goa. He also questioned why the authorities had been allowing boxing championships where participants were badly mauled and sometimes maimed.But he asserted that the injured animals would be medically treated on a war-footing with the care taken at the site of fights.UNI
8/4/2008
www.indlawnews.com

Treat press ID cards as curfew passes: J&K HC
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Treat_press_ID_cards_as_curfew_passes_JK_HC/articleshow/3325352.cms
JAMMU: The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on Monday directed the district administration to treat media identity cards as curfew passes and ensure that they (cards) are honoured by curfew enforcing agencies, including Army. Passing orders on a PIL, a division bench of justices J P Singh and Sunil Hali, also lifted a restriction placed by the administration banning SMS services, until the next hearing on August 8. "The administration must treat press identity cards as curfew passes so that media persons can perform their duties. It must also ensure that law enforcing agencies/curfew agencies, including Army, honour press cards." The bench also stayed an order of Jammu district magistrate and permitted broadcast of local channels- JK Channel and Take-i Channel till August 8. The PIL was filed by the Bar Association of Jammu.
4 Aug 2008, 1752 hrs IST,PTI
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Bombay HC refuses to allow termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks http://www.indlawnews.com/Newsdisplay.aspx?04273633-df8f-488e-a102-29f625d05dd0
In a landmark judgment, Bombay High Court today refused to grant permission for termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks after rejecting a petition filed by a couple, seeking an amendment to the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act by allowing abortion of a 25 week fetus, diagnosed with an heart ailment.A division bench, consisting of Justice J N Patel and Justice K K Tatde, in their order, questioned that once there is life can you kill it?, saying that the report submitted by medical experts of government run J J hospital did not indicate that child will have abnormalities.The court passed the order in response to a petition filed by a Mumbai gynecologist, Dr Nikhil Datar, and the teacher couple who identified themselves in court papers as only Mr X and Mrs Y. Earlier, the court had sought the report from the medical experts but apparently finding it confusing, it sought a second opinion.The second opinion, which was tabled today before the bench, indicated that there is a low possibility that the child will be handicapped.During the hearing of the petition, the court was informed that petitioner, Mrs Y, the woman, who is expecting her first child, found out only in the twenty-fourth week of her pregnancy that the fetus had a congenital heart block. Doctors told her that the child would need a pacemaker right from the time of birth and the quality of its life would be poor. Gynecologist Dr Nikhil Datar, had argued that some ailments in the fetus are detected only between the 20th and the 24th week of pregnancy. However, according to the current law, pregnancy cannot be terminated beyond 20 weeks.Considering the fact that an abortion at this advanced stage is illegal, the medical practitioners refused to abort the child. UNI
8/4/2008
www.indlawnews.com

Madras HC orders notices to Law Ministry, TN govt.and a former Ad. Judge http://www.indlawnews.com/newsdisplay.aspx?f06441e6-879e-4c00-9211-b946b6cbb6c9
Madras High Court today ordered notice to the Union Law Ministry, Tamil Nadu Government and former Additional Judge N Kannadasan on a petition, challenging Mr Kannadasan's appointment as the State Consumer Disputes Redressel Commission President. A Division Bench, comprising Mr Justice P K Misra and Mr Justice K Kannan directed the petitioners to remove the name of Chief Justice A K Ganguly from the respondents list. Ms Vaigai, the Counsel for the petitioners, accepted it and removed the name. The Judges ordered notice of motion, indicating that the writ petition shall be disposed off at the stage of admission. Stating that private notice was also permitted, the Judges directed the Registry to post the matter to August 25 for further hearing. Eleven practicing advocates of the High Court, including C Vijayakumar and Anna Mathew, submitted in their quo-warranto writ petition that Mr Kannadasan's appointment was illegal under the Constitution. "As an Additional Judge, Mr Kannadasan passed several unusual and improper orders with complete disregard to statuary mandates and well-settled proposition of Law. Several accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychosis Traffic Substances Act (NDBS) were released on bail, while one of the accused was still absconding," the petitioners contended. The petitioners also submitted that Mr Kannadasan had "misused his office as a Judge and used the judicial system for his own benefit through his then juniors." "As per the Constitution and the Supreme Court ruling, a High Court Judge or a retired Judge can only be appointed as the President of a Commission. Mr Kannadasan has worked as an Additional Judge for two years from 2003 to 2005 and the apex court has not made him a permanent Judge," the petitioners added.UNI
8/4/2008
www.indlawnews.com

HC directive to govt on plea by visually impaired graduates
http://www.thehindu.com/holnus/004200808042071.htm
Chennai (PTI): The Madras High Court on Monday directed the Tamil Nadu Government to keep three posts of Post Graduate Assistants (Commerce) vacant on a petition seeking a direction to the government to include visually impaired graduates/post graduates in Commerce for recruitment to teachers post in higher secondary schools.
The above direction was given by Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar while hearing the petition filed by three visually impaired candidates, who had done their Post-Graduation in Commerce with B Ed.
The petitioners contended that "number of visually impaired graduates and post-graduates with B Ed, M Ed and M Phil qualification in commerce, ecomonics, music and political science are waiting for employment opportunity for several years after registering their names in employment exchanges."
The petitioners submitted that "the College Students and Graduates Association of Blind, which reports the problem of the blind graduates and post-graduates to the government, had failed to enclose the list of blind candidates in other subjects for the teachers post. They maintained the list of candidates in Tamil and History alone."
"The commerce post-graduates with B Ed, M Ed and M Phil qualification are not provided with teachers post for the decades together," they added.
www.thehindu.com

HC removes Ratan Tata's name from suit against TCS http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Services/HC_removes_Ratan_Tatas_name_from_suit_against_TCS/articleshow/3325660.cms
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday removed the name of TATA group chairman, Ratan Tata from a civil suit seeking compensation from Tata Consultancy Services. Dileep Ghosh moved High Court after his son Randip Ghosh, a TCS employee, died in road accident in Boston, USA, in 2000. Randip was sent to Boston by the TCS, so his father sought compensation of Rs 30 lakh from the company. Ghosh had also made Ratan Tata, Tata group chairman, a respondent in the suit. Tata's lawyers argued that accident had nothing to do with TCS and moreover Tata personally can not be held vicariously liable for the accident. Upholding this argument, Justice R Y Ganoo directed that Ratan Tata's name be removed from the suit, which is pending before the High Court.
4 Aug, 2008, 2013 hrs IST, PTI
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

HC stalls recruitment of attendants at GMC
http://www.navhindtimes.com/articles.php?Story_ID=080320
PANAJI — In a petition filed by one Lila Usgaokar and nine others the Division bench of the Bombay High Court has directed the government not to go ahead with the recruitment process for the 25 posts of attendants at Goa Medical College, Bambolim.
The petitioners had challenged the recruitment process on the ground that the recruitment rules were not followed by the government.
According to the petitioners the post of attendants are required to be filled by way of transfer of the sweepers who have three years experience.
It was submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the recruitment process by way of direct recruitment could not have been done without considering the eligible sweepers.
The petitioners have stated that the entire recruitment process has been carried in haste in as the advertisement was issued on July 12 while the last date for submission of application was July 18.
The court has accordingly asked the government not to go ahead with the recruitment process.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
NT NETWORK
www.navhindtimes.com

HC to set up larger Bench to hear alimony default case
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Ahmedabad/HC_to_set_up_larger_Bench_to_hear_alimony_default_case/articleshow/3319890.cms
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat High Court has decided to set up a larger Bench to adjudge the issue of default of payment of alimony afresh. This decision came after confusion arose over two conflicting judgments by separate division benches on the same issue. The Bench will finalize whether men, who fail to pay maintenance amount to their estranged wives, can be put behind the bars for more than one month. The debate arose with a petition by Rama Muru Pariya from Khambhaliya, presently lodged in jail, who has challenged a lower court's order to imprison him for 980 days. As per case details, Pariya was asked to pay alimony under Section 125 of CrPC by a magistrate in Khambhaliya in 1999. However, he failed to pay the compensation as per the court's order. Some time back, his wife approached the court complaining against her husband. Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) held him guilty for non-compliance of the court's order and sentenced him to jail for 980 days. An additional sessions judge too confirmed this order on March 15 this year. From inside the jail, he approached the HC claiming that as per Supreme Court's judgement, courts cannot put him behind the bars for more than a month. To the court's surprise, two conflicting orders by HC itself also came to be discussed during the hearing. Interestingly, the two Benches of this court had interpreted the SC order differently. In 1999, the apex court had held in such alimony related case that under section 125 (3) of CrPC, no lower court can punish husbands with imprisonment exceeding one month, or until the payment of alimony, if made sooner. And, in case of further defiance of order by husbands, the wife can approach the court again for similar punishment. Interestingly, in two different cases the separate co-ordinated benches of HC differed in dealing with similar situations with the first bench holding 23 months' jail for a husband as proper, while the second maintaining that a magistrate cannot award more than 30-day imprisonment as per Supreme Court ruling. After going through these details, Justice HN Devani observed, "It appears that the earlier view by this court had not been brought to the notice of the court when the subsequent decision was rendered. This resulted into two conflicting views on the same issue." Holding that the earlier view by HC was correct but since there are conflicting judgements by Gujarat HC on the same issue, she has referred the case to a larger bench. This means a three-judge bench would now decide the issue.
3 Aug 2008, 0437 hrs IST,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Couple abuses HC reliefCHANDIGARH:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chandigarh/Couple_abuses_HC_relief/articleshow/3319676.cms
Child custody battles can't get nastier than this. A couple, overwhelmed by a misplaced desire to retain their "adopted" daughter at all costs, took the very court that had granted them succour, for granted, and did the vanishing act to the UK, leaving "biological" parents of the minor girl high and dry. Stunned by the audacity of Seema Kapoor and Surinder Kumar, the couple who fled to the UK on six months' visa, a fuming Punjab and Haryana High Court was left with no choice but to severely admonish them for misusing the relief granted. The HC also asked, in a recent order, as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. This is not all. Justice Rajive Bhalla, known for his no-nonsense attitude, also sounded out the British High Commission on the couple's hoodwinking of law, suggesting that the commission might take any action it deemed fit under given circumstances. He also appointed Anil Malhotra, a city lawyer reputed for his profound understanding of international child custody disputes, as amicus curiae to assist the court in unravelling the knots of the complicated case. The SSP, Hoshiarpur, was directed to register a case against petitioners for taking the girl, Aishley Kapoor, out of the country without prior permission of the High Court. Acknowledging the grief of Aishley's "biological" parents, Deepak and Jyoti Kapoor, justice Bhalla accorded them an opportunity to move an international family justice forum in the UK to explore the possibility of restoring the girl to the jurisdiction of the High Court here. An equally potent alternative of moving a court of competent jurisdiction in the UK was also suggested to beleaguered Deepak and Jyoti Kapoor so that they could hammer on the fact of illegal removal of their daughter from India. The facts of the case are that Deepak and Jyoti had filed a plea before a Guardian and Wards Court in Dasuya, district Hoshiarpur, seeking custody of their minor daughter Aishley Kapoor. The said plea was vigorously contested by Seema and Surinder, who asserted that Aishley had been given to them in adoption. However, the Guardian and Wards Court (Additional Civil Judge's Court) allowed the plea of Deepak and Jyoti, much to the dismay of Seema and her husband. Aggrieved, Seema and Surinder came rushing to the High Court, which stayed the lower court's order granting interim custody of the child to Deepak and Jyoti Kapoor (respondents before HC). The twist in the tale came when the counsel for Deepak and Jyoti informed justice Bhalla that Seema and her husband had taken undue advantage of the order and had fled to the UK along with Aishley. The peeved judge summoned the SSP, Hoshiarpur, to the court and sought a detailed report on the issue. The SSP confirmed respondent's fears that Seema and Surinder had fled to the UK with the minor girl.
3 Aug 2008, 0154 hrs IST, Vishal Sharma,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

NCR needs 1 HC: Bar association http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Delhi/NCR_needs_1_HC_Bar_association/articleshow/3319783.cms
NEW DELHI: Even as it awaits further word from the Chief Minister's office, Delhi High Court Bar Association (HCBA) pressed its case for a common high court in NCR region on Saturday by citing examples of Delhi Metro, inter state bus services and sharing of administrative aspects between Gurgaon, Noida and the capital, arguing NCR was a single unit. Pushing for extension of jurisdiction of Delhi High Court to cover the entire NCR region, HCBA, led by its President K C Mittal maintained that there should be a common justice delivery mechanism available for NCR citizens in the form of a single High Court and added that Delhi High Court was ideally suited for the purpose. "All the citizens living in NCR should have the opportunity of knocking the door of justice at a minimum distance... NCR is a concept developed to minimize the problems of citizens in all walks of life but they are denied access to HC nearest to them," Mittal said, saying he hoped his proposal lying with the chief minister bears some result. Justifying his claim for a common NCR high court, Mittal and HCBA secretary D K Sharma pointed out how Delhi Metro, interstate bus services, administration and law and order were all wired up towards providing basic services to all NCR residents. “From the litigants point of view this will provide easy access and convenience to justice delivery and will save valuable time and money. It will be a remarkable move to cater to needs of faster and speedier justice," the president said. (abhinav.garg@timesgroup.com)
3 Aug 2008, 0322 hrs IST, Abhinav Garg,TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

HC refuses to uphold single Judge order on property rights case http://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=8373
Chennai: Madras High Court has ruled that within the circumspect nature of jurisdiction of a writ court, finding about the nature of a property right should not be arrived at, nor any finding about the parties committing criminal trespass should be ventured.
Such questions should be left to be decided by the appropriate forum created under the law, the First Bench comprising Chief Justice A K Ganguly and Mr Justice F M Ibrahim Kalifulla observed, while passing orders on a writ appeal, preferred by one Pushparaj, challenging a single Judge order, allowing police protection to the petitioners to enjoy the property purchased by them in Vadanemili Village of Kancheepuram District.
In the Judgment, the Bench said it was clear that the single Judge of the writ court had sought to decide the property rights of the contesting parties in respect of a piece of land. The Judge gave an interim direction permitting the petitioner to put up structures on the land in question.
The Bench said the counsel for the parties had submitted that there were civil suits pending between them and also a civil court decree.
'''It was clear that in the instant case, police protection had been prayed for and the same had been granted by the single Judge by an interim order in favour of the writ petitioner in respect of his property right.
Such an order could not be sustained,'' the Judges said citing a Supreme Court decision. The parties were at liberty to work out heir remedies before the civil court, the Judges held.
(Edwin)
Publication Date 3/8/2008 12:35:07 PM(IST)
www.mynews.in

SC special bench to hear PF scam today sans CJI http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=459409&sid=NAT
New Delhi, Aug 01: A three-judge special bench of the Supreme Court, sans the Chief Justice who has recused himself, is scheduled to hear the controversial Uttar Pradesh multi-crore provident fund scam allegedly involving a sitting apex court judge and others. Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, who has recused himself after objections from certain quarters, has constituted the special bench comprising Justices B N Aggrawal, V S Sirpurkar and G S Singhvi for hearing the matter.Justice B N Aggrawal is the senior-most judge in the apex court after Chief Justice Balakrishnan. The Chief Justice had recused himself from the matter after former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan had requested him to do so.Bhushan's argument was that since the CJI had already passed certain administrative orders vis-a-vis the probe in the scam, he should not hear the matter on the judicial side.The Chief Justice had earlier issued notices to the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government on a petition by the Ghaziabad Bar Association seeking investigation into the provident fund scam in the state.In the petition it was alleged that 26 members of judiciary, including an apex court judge, seven Allahabad High Court judge, six retired High Court judge and 12 judges from subordinate judiciary in the state, were beneficiary of crores of rupees allegedly withdrawn from the provident fund account of third and fourth-grade employees in Ghaziabad region between 2001 and 2008. Bureau Report
www.zeenews.com

Hyde Act provisions shaping nuclear deal, says CPI(M)
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/08/03/stories/2008080351310300.htm
The CPI(M) on Saturday said the provisions of the Hyde Act are deciding the final shape of the Indo-US nuclear deal and not the assurances given by the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, to Parliament.
Civilian facilities
Stating that it has now become clear that 14 Indian civilian nuclear facilities will come under perpetual IAEA safeguards from 2009, the Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) in a statement said: “That the interpretation of the Indian Government regarding the “corrective measures” mentioned in the preamble of the safeguards agreement providing for a check against disruption of fuel supplies does not hold has been made clear by the IAEA.”
The party pointed out to the introductory statement made by the IAEA Director-General, Dr Mohamed El Baradei, to the Board of Governors where he had said: “As with other safeguards agreements between the agency and member states, the (Indian) agreement is of indefinite duration. There are no conditions for the discontinuation of safeguards other than those provided by the safeguards agreement itself. The termination provisions contained in the agreement are the same as for other 66-type agreements.”
This would mean that the safeguards agreement can only be terminated under the standard termination conditions contained in Articles 29 and 32 of the agreement, implying that nuclear facilities can be withdrawn from safeguards only after these facilities are no longer usable for any nuclear activity, the CPI(M) said.
The Polit Bureau statement added: “This belies the Prime Minister’s assurance in Parliament that India’s civilian nuclear facilities would be put under perpetual IAEA safeguards only under the strictly reciprocal condition of uninterrupted fuel supply guarantees.”
So, neither does the 123 agreement with the US provide any such fuel supply guarantee nor can the IAEA ensure uninterrupted fuel supply as it is only a monitoring agency, the party said.
Business Daily from
THE HINDU group of publications
Sunday, Aug 03, 2008
Our Bureau
www.thehindubusinessline.com

Hyde Act will lead the path of nuke deal: CPI (M)
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200808021441.htm
New Delhi (PTI): The CPI(M), spearheading the Left opposition to the Indo-US nuclear deal, on Saturday alleged that the safeguards agreement approved by the IAEA showed that the US Hyde Act would determine the path of the deal.
"The provisions of the Hyde Act and not the assurances made by the Indian Prime Minister in Parliament are shaping the course of the Indo-US nuclear deal through the various stages," the party said.
The CPI(M) Politburo issued the statement a day after the IAEA unanimously approved the India-specific safeguards agreement, which was hailed as "historic" by the Congress.
Other Left parties have already attacked the agreement, saying it does not recognise India's nuclear weapon status nor does it protect its interests on issues like uninterrupted fuel supply assurances.
The Left parties, which withdrew support to the Government on the issue last month, have been stridently critical of the Hyde Act which they allege would affect India's sovereignty and strategic autonomy.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
www.hindu.com

HC helps man who lost his land to govt after 43 years
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/HC_helps_man_who_lost_his_land_to_govt_after_43_years/articleshow/3319738.cms
NEW DELHI: He has been fighting a lone battle for 43 years to recover a plot that belonged to his father but was allegedly appropriated and sold by the government as evacuee property. Now the Delhi High Court has taken cognisance of Qayyum Khan’s plight. A division bench of the court has ordered the government to deposit with it the Rs 12,500 it had received from the sale of the plot in south Delhi’s Bhogal neighbourhood, along with interest, before it decides how to move ahead in the case. Khan’s case exemplifies how the trauma of partition - when many families migrated to Pakistan, resulting in their land and other property being treated as evacuee property - continues to haunt many in India even today. The irony in Khan’s case was that his father Chand Khan never migrated, and was alive and working in the capital even after partition in 1947. The latter even approached the authorities for restoration of the property but failed to get it back. It was in 1965, after the plot had been sold by the government, that Qayyum Khan decided to go to court. The bench comprising Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah and Justice S Muralidhar last week noted that 60-year-old Khan has fighting the case for 43 years and that the government had been repeatedly appealing against every court decision instead of trying to ease his misery. The court has also appointed a counsel for Khan, keeping in view his pecuniary condition. “The money is meagre, but I hope justice will finally prevail,” the frail Khan, who performs odd jobs at the court, said. Khan’s travails began in 1965, when the 422 sq. yard plot number 591 in Bhogal was sold by the government’s rehabilitation department after being classified as evacuee property - meaning that its owner had either migrated to Pakistan after partition or could not be traced. The land originally belonged to Khan’s uncle and then to his father and he claimed it as the surviving legal heir. In fact, Khan’s father also owned plot numbers 593 and 594 in the same area but he has not filed any claims for them as he does not have the necessary papers. Court records show that Khan’s father Chand Khan had only left the area at the time of partition, apparently fearing for his life. But he did not go to Pakistan. After the Administration of Evacuee Property Act came into force in 1950, all such vacant land was progressively taken over by the government and subsequently sold via auctions. And that was how the Khan family’s travails began and continue to this day.
3 Aug, 2008, 0237 hrs IST, IANS
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

HC asks State to deposit Rs 15 lakhs withdrawn fraudulentlyhttp://e-pao.net/GP.asp?src=9..030808.aug08
Imphal, August 02: In a significant verdict, the Gauhati high court has asked the state respondents to deposit a GPF amount of Rs 15, 95,000 meant for seven lecturers of government run Lilong Haoreibi College.This followed a writ petition filed by the lecturers led by K Ibetombi Devi after this huge amount was found to have been fraudulently withdrawn from the General Provident Fund account of the petitioners allegedly by Respondent No 6 principal of the same college, Md Majher Ali in collusion with some unknown persons, said case dossiers.The same was detected sometime in 2005 and accordingly, the police registered a case against the frau-dulent withdrawal, the dossiers said adding the principal was also given the power and authority of DDO for the teaching and non-teaching staff of the college.Because of such overdrawal and fraudulent withdrawal from the GPF account of the petitioners, a negative balance in respect of such account had come up.In his Imphal bench sitting Justice Asok Potsangbam asked the State represented by higher education and finance commissioners to deposit the amount due to the petitioners with " accruable interest" in the respective GPF account within three months from the date of passing this order.The respondent No 5 (Accountant General) Manipur, shall take all steps to ensure that the amount so deposited in the GPF account of the petitioners are released to the petitioners in accordance with rules, without any hindrance, said the order.While passing this order the Court said the petitioners are entitled to withdraw and enjoy the amount deposited in their GPF account along with the permissible interest."Even if the amount has been withdrawn fraudulently by some culprits, there is still a legal obligation on the part of the Government to ensure that the depositors are not deprived of their savings made from their hard earned salary and if this is not done, the entire Government employees may loose faith and confidence in the Government?", the ordr said."After all , the Government respondents are the custodians of the GPF amounts deposited by the petitioners", it added.Advocate N Kumarjit appeared on behalf of the petitioners.
Source: The Sangai Express
http://e-pao.net

SC castigates insurance companies for 'unreasonable' approach
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=&id=113e142a-357c-4cbd-aefd-57a5f8bae41e&&Headline=SC+castigates+insurance+companies&strParent=strParentID
The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the increasing tendency of insurance companies to deny compensation to claimants of motor vehicle accidents.
A bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and H S Bedi lamented that insurance companies, being in a dominant position, often act in an "unreasonable" manner after having taken the premium.
"The insurance companies often act in an unreasonable manner and after having accepted the value of a particular insured goods, disown that very figure on one pretext or the other when they are called upon to pay compensation.
This 'take it or leave it' attitude is clearly unwarranted not only as being bad in law but ethically indefensible," the bench remarked in its judgement.
The bench passed its observations while upholding an appeal filed by Dharmender Goel, owner of a vehicle.
Goel has insured his vehicle for Rs 3,54,000 which met with an accident. The Oriental Insurance Company, with which the vehicle was insured, repudiated the claim on the ground that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence.
The insurance company's surveyor had submitted a report that the vehicle suffered "total loss" and valued the loss at Rs 1.80 lakh.
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, August 03, 2008
First Published: 09:56 IST(3/8/2008)
www.hindustantimes.com