Contact Us

By
G-Mail: legalassistance94070@gmail.com
Contact Me

Comments

Post a Comment

Thank you

Popular posts from this blog

MACC Negligence Principles

By
Negligence Principles 1       Whether it is necessary for the claimant to prove rash and negligent driving in claim u/s 166 M.V. Act. ? Held Yes. The claim for compensation was filed by parents of the deceased under S.166 and not under S.163A, therefore, the burden to prove an act of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle was on claimants.  If they failed to discharge it by adducing cogent evidence, then rejection of the claim filed by claimants under S. 166 was proper.  Surinder Kumar Arora and Anr. v. Dr. Manoj Bisla and Ors., A.I.R. 2012 S.C. 1918. The victim of an accident or his dependents has an option either to proceed under S. 166 or section 163–A of the Act. Once they approach the Tribunal under section 166, they have necessarily to take upon themselves the burden of establishing the negligence of the driver or owner of the vehicle concerned.  Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Meena Varial, (2007) 3 SCC 4...
Read more »

Section 29 And 30 Pocso Act 2012

By
Legal Assistance Section 29 And 30 Pocso Act 2012 In order to combat the heinous crime of sexual abuse and exploitation of children through unclear and strict legal provisions, the Ministry of Women and Child Development pushed for the introduction of the POCSO ( Law on Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) in 2012. The law was enacted to protect children from sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography and to provide for the establishment of special courts for the prosecution of such offences and related issues and incidents. The POCSO Act is a special law passed by the legislature to act as an association of persons best suited to the welfare and interests of children. A kind of action which is gender neutral and which considers children's welfare and well-being at all stages to be the top priority to ensure a healthy physical, emotional, intellectual and social development of children.       Section 29 of the Sexual Offences Protection of Childre...
Read more »

Hindu Marriage Act 1955 Section 13B

By
Legal Assistance Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act Mr Prakash Alumal Kalandari and Ms Jahnavi Prakash Kalandari decided before the Bombay High Court that a divorce petition filed by Simplicitor envoys under Section 13B of the law must convince the Court that the consent of both parties will continue to exist until the date on which the divorce judgment is issued. The decision in Sureshta Devi case was accepted by a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court of India in a separate case by Smruti Pahariya, in which the court claimed that the court's divorce decree was based on Section 13(b) of that law the continued mutual agreement of both parties. If one of the parties withdraws its consent, the court has no power to issue the decree with respect to the mandate of Section 13b of Hindu Marriage Act.   Paragraph 23 (1) provides that the mutual consent established in 1976 in the proceedings can be defended not only if the court is convinced that the divorce is sought on the basis of mut...
Read more »