Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:19
Dear Sir
As per below links appears that as per supreme court no Excise duty applicable on Ayurvedic Medicines
1) parliamentoindia.nic.in
2) timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articles/ msid-1447233
3)www.business-standard.com/india/news/no-dutyayurvedic-medicine
Please reply me so that we can follow as per rules.
thanking you
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:12
Hello everyone....
i wanted some brief information regarding the case STATE OF MAHARASHTRA V. DR. PRAFULLA K.DESAI (2003) 4 SCC 601.
And i also wanted that how can i relate the above mentioned case with Article 21. of the Constitution Of India.
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:06
In writ petition if the respondent has mentioend that there was a complaint made to infomration commission but failed to mention that outcome of the enquiry conducted by the informaiton commission will that be held against the respondent in the appeal.
The writ petition was filed by public authority to quash the order of information commission however the respondent/ RTI applicant has also got a findings against the public authorities in another order passed prior to this impugned order of the information commission.
The writ petition was allowed without considering the earlier order and respondent prefers an appeal against this order.
Please clarify. Thanks
Anonymous
05 April 2011 at 20:34
The Supreme Court may reverse, modify or affirm the judgment-decree or order appealed against while exercising its appellate jurisdiction and not while exercising the discretionary jurisdiction disposing of petition for special leave to appeal. The doctrine of merger can therefore be applied to the former and not to the latter.
Query : what does the exact meaning of discretionary jurisdiction says because i am shocked that i the judment give by the SC by this discretionary jurisdiction than it cannot be applied in doctrine of merger ? pls tell whether i am right or wrong ? also how to know form the case law context that the judgment of the SC is form the discretionary jurisdiction ? pls
B.B.R.Goud.
05 April 2011 at 20:13
if the manegement, of any organisation registered under the registration of societies act in india, is not paying the salaries in time, who is the competent person in general?
Anonymous
05 April 2011 at 19:58
when court based its decision on basis of concession, the decision not a binding precedent AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 1273 "Kulwant Kaur v. Gurdial Singh Mann"
Query : what do u mean by on basis of concession or can anybody give me the context of the case law .
Anonymous
05 April 2011 at 19:43
I a fighting a case in (bombay high court)& a frined of my have give me a case law which was dismissed as it has been written in the last para of the judgment goes in no one's favour & the case is dismissed so i toke that case to my lawyer & he send that we cant take this case as a binding precedent or we cant reliey on his case as it has been dismissed & not in the favour of any one. my lawyer also told me that when any case is dismissed in any court in india it has been said that doctrine of precedent is not applicable to that case because the case is dismissed & not in the favour of any one of the party ? Doctrine of precdent is not applicable to the dismissed case ? is it right or wrong if right can we i have the case law on it which mentioned that dismissed case can be taken as a binding precedent.
thank.
Anonymous
02 April 2011 at 16:33
A witness standing in the witness box & giving the evidence or he was cross examined during that time other witness standing by side or any person for the or public sitting in a open court (called as a layman audience) says some bad words to the accused or the witness who was cross examined than it has been said as per the contempt of cour act, 1971 section 2 he was purposelly interfering the court proceedings so it is said that it is a contempt of court & person is laible for contempt case but as per section 10 no High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
if any offence is punisable under the IPC, 1860 than no contempt case will be held. So know contempt case should be filed or section 499 (defamamtion) case should be filed against that person. Becasue as th person was givin bad words to xyz person in the court during the proceedings so it is a defamation becasue he was insulting the person without any reason but simaltenoulsy it is contempt of court also so which one will prewill & can both the case (contempt case, Section 499) can be filed on that person ?
Section 10 Every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempt's of courts subordinate to it and it has and exercise in respect of contempt's of itself.
Provided that no High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
Also can both the cases can be filled under the same court or any different court repsectively.
Thanks
God Bless U All.
Anonymous
22 March 2011 at 17:44
I have posted a query on Transport Woes in the Expert's forum. The facts in the issue are very glaring that though every citizen is aware of the plight, no concrete steps have been initiated to set things in order. Public Interest Litigation do not necessarily yield the desired results to highlight the matters which are detrimental to Public Interest at large. My specific doubts are summed up as under:
(a) As in the case of high profile matters, under which circumstances the Court intervenes into the matters which are detrimental to public interests?
(b) What are the Constitutional provisions and obligations on the part of the Apex or High Courts to question the authority of the State ?
(c) Is there any Judicial Committee which monitors the matters which upset the peace and tranquility in the State on account of misdemeanors of Public Authorities?
(d) Are there any precedents which match the similar facts where interests of common citizens are protected by the intervention of Courts?
(e) Whether any High Court is vested with any constitutional powers to question the acts of the State in the absence of any Public Interest Litigation?
I need specific point-war guidance from the expert panel in the interest of Common Citizens.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
PBPL (Person Below Proverty Line)
Without prejudice to the provisions of section 8, a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may reject a request for information where such a request for providing access would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State.
actually not understood the meaning of (involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State.)
as how to know that the person is below poverty line becasue if the person is below poverty line he is exempt form paying the fees ?