<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:openSearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:blogger="http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008" xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:gd="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" gd:etag="W/&quot;AkIBSH84eCp7ImA9WhBaEUk.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227</id><updated>2013-05-21T20:32:39.130+05:30</updated><category term="Dowry" /><category term="Legal Education" /><category term="Law Series" /><category term="Banking law" /><category term="Environmental Law" /><category term="SSRN papers" /><category term="Res Ipsa Loquitur" /><category term="Cyber Law" /><category term="Death Penalty" /><category term="University IP" /><category term="Competition Law" /><category term="Updates from Legal circles" /><category term="Practice and Procedure" /><category term="Expert's Corner" /><category term="WTO" /><category term="International Law" /><category term="Aviation Law" /><category term="Medical Law" /><category term="Corporate Governance" /><category term="Tenancy Law" /><category term="Election law" /><category term="Economic-Political outlook" /><category term="This blog related ..." /><category term="Cheque-Bounce Law" /><category term="Sports Law" /><category term="Anti-Hijacking Law" /><category term="Public Interest Litigation" /><category term="Constitutional Law" /><category term="Automobiles" /><category term="Indian Legal Institutions" /><category term="Legal Institutions" /><category term="Privacy Law" /><category term="Copyright" /><category term="Budget" /><category term="Arbitration" /><category term="Human Rights" /><category term="Nuclear Deal" /><category term="Media Law" /><category term="Right to Information" /><category term="Service Law" /><category term="Law and Society" /><category term="Tax" /><category term="IPR" /><category term="Forest Law" /><category term="Law Resources" /><category term="Gender Equality" /><category term="Legal Concepts" /><category term="Justice" /><category term="Extradition" /><category term="Anti-Terrorism Law" /><category term="Domestic Violence" /><category term="Featured Articles" /><category term="Company Law" /><category term="Insurance Law" /><category term="Criminal Law" /><category term="Consumer Law" /><category term="e-commerce" /><title>Law-in-Perspective</title><subtitle type="html">Dedicated to the cause of providing insights into law's whys and hows.
Focusing on content from India but then covering the legal arena from all over the world.</subtitle><link rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/" /><link rel="next" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default?start-index=11&amp;max-results=10&amp;redirect=false&amp;v=2" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><generator version="7.00" uri="http://www.blogger.com">Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>766</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>10</openSearch:itemsPerPage><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/LawInPerspective" /><feedburner:info uri="lawinperspective" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><geo:lat>28.4</geo:lat><geo:long>77.2</geo:long><link rel="license" type="text/html" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/" /><logo>http://www.feedburner.com/fb/images/pub/fb_pwrd.gif</logo><feedburner:emailServiceId>LawInPerspective</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://add.my.yahoo.com/rss?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/my/addtomyyahoo4.gif">Subscribe with My Yahoo!</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.newsgator.com/ngs/subscriber/subext.aspx?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.newsgator.com/images/ngsub1.gif">Subscribe with NewsGator</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://feeds.my.aol.com/add.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://o.aolcdn.com/favorites.my.aol.com/webmaster/ffclient/webroot/locale/en-US/images/myAOLButtonSmall.gif">Subscribe with My AOL</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.bloglines.com/sub/http://feeds.feedburner.com/LawInPerspective" src="http://www.bloglines.com/images/sub_modern11.gif">Subscribe with Bloglines</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.netvibes.com/subscribe.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.netvibes.com/img/add2netvibes.gif">Subscribe with Netvibes</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif">Subscribe with Google</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.pageflakes.com/subscribe.aspx?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.pageflakes.com/ImageFile.ashx?instanceId=Static_4&amp;fileName=ATP_blu_91x17.gif">Subscribe with Pageflakes</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.plusmo.com/add?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://plusmo.com/res/graphics/fbplusmo.gif">Subscribe with Plusmo</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://my.feedlounge.com/external/subscribe?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://static.feedlounge.com/buttons/subscribe_0.gif">Subscribe with FeedLounge</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/hp/AddRSS.aspx?http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://img.tfd.com/hp/addToTheFreeDictionary.gif">Subscribe with The Free Dictionary</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.bitty.com/manual/?contenttype=rssfeed&amp;contentvalue=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.bitty.com/img/bittychicklet_91x17.gif">Subscribe with Bitty Browser</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.live.com/?add=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://tkfiles.storage.msn.com/x1piYkpqHC_35nIp1gLE68-wvzLZO8iXl_JMledmJQXP-XTBOLfmQv4zhj4MhcWEJh_GtoBIiAl1Mjh-ndp9k47If7hTaFno0mxW9_i3p_5qQw">Subscribe with Live.com</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://mix.excite.eu/add?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://image.excite.co.uk/mix/addtomix.gif">Subscribe with Excite MIX</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.yourminis.com/subscribe.aspx?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.yourminis.com/images/addtoyourminisbadge.gif">Subscribe with Yourminis.com</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://download.attensa.com/app/get_attensa.html?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.attensa.com/blogs/attensa/WindowsLiveWriter/BadgeredintoBadges_10C02/attensa_feed_button5.gif">Subscribe with Attensa for Outlook</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.webwag.com/wwgthis.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.webwag.com/images/wwgthis.gif">Subscribe with Webwag</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://hub.netomat.net/account/account.autoSubscribe.jspa?urls=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.netomat.net/blogger/images/icon_netomat_feedbutton.gif">Subscribe with netomat Hub</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.dailyrotation.com/index.php?feed=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.dailyrotation.com/rss-dr2.gif">Subscribe with Daily Rotation</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.podcastready.com/oneclick_bookmark.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.podcastready.com/images/podcastready_button.gif">Subscribe with Podcast Ready</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.flurry.com/pushRssFeed.do?r=fb&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.flurry.com/images/flurry_rss_logo2.gif">Subscribe with Flurry</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="https://intouch.particls.com/download/?mode=2&amp;feed=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="https://intouch.particls.com/resources/buttons/it-button2.gif">Subscribe with Particls</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.addtoany.com/?linkname=Law-in-Perspective&amp;linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective&amp;type=feed" src="http://www.addtoany.com/addfr-b.gif">Add to Any Feed Reader</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.fwicki.com/users/default.aspx?addfeed=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2FLawInPerspective" src="http://www.fwicki.com/images/ui/fwicki_clicklet.png">Subscribe with fwicki</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:browserFriendly>This content is brought to you exclusive by Law-In-Perspective. Subscribe www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for regular posts to be delivered to your mail box.</feedburner:browserFriendly><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DUIHQnY7fCp7ImA9WhZVGE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-6726906138977761449</id><published>2011-05-31T07:35:00.000+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-31T07:35:33.804+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-31T07:35:33.804+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Law and Society" /><title>Transparency in Land Allotment essential: Supreme Court</title><content type="html">In his recent decision in the matter of Akhil Bhartiya Upbhokta Congress v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Justice G. S. Singhvi of the Supreme Court culled out the principles of administrative law and constitutional governance to declare that the State could not act in an arbitrary manner to grant favourable land allotments without following principles of public policy so as to grant equal opportunity to all the citizens.&amp;nbsp;

Called upon to decide the question "Whether the decision of the Government of Madhya Pradesh to allot 20 acres land comprised in Khasra Nos. 82/1 and 83 of village Bawadiya Kalan, Tehsil Huzur, District Bhopal to late Shri Kushabhau Thakre Memorial Trust without inviting other similarly situated organisations/institutions to participate in the...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=ywK9YSW9uGU:JMl7K0f6FcA:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/ywK9YSW9uGU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/6726906138977761449/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=6726906138977761449&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/6726906138977761449?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/6726906138977761449?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/ywK9YSW9uGU/transparency-in-land-allotment.html" title="Transparency in Land Allotment essential: Supreme Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/transparency-in-land-allotment.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DU8GQXo6eCp7ImA9WhZWFE4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-3044165366541735294</id><published>2011-05-15T11:07:00.000+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-15T11:07:00.410+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-15T11:07:00.410+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Law and Society" /><title>Creditor cannot obtain forcible possession through police: High Court</title><content type="html">In its recently reported decision, Clarity Gold Pvt. Ltd. v. State Bank of India (AIR 2011 Bom 42), the Bombay has declared that "no secured creditor can by seeking assistance of police machinery unilaterally carry out the eviction of the borrower and take over forcible possession of the secured asset". The High Court was dealing with a matter relating to debt recovery wherein it had been alleged that the possession of the assets with the help of the police without orders of the Court. While the High Court did not rule on the factual aspect, it indeed declared that it was no permissible for the creditors to obtain possession through use of force.

The High Court inter alia observed as under;17 On behalf of the Petitioners, it has been urged that in the&amp;nbsp; present...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0CdSjxT2g2M:QlTmf4gvPBM:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/0CdSjxT2g2M" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/3044165366541735294/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=3044165366541735294&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/3044165366541735294?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/3044165366541735294?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/0CdSjxT2g2M/creditor-cannot-obtain-forcible.html" title="Creditor cannot obtain forcible possession through police: High Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/creditor-cannot-obtain-forcible.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;D0QBRns8eCp7ImA9WhZVE0U.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-4718837360055671347</id><published>2011-05-14T11:22:00.002+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-26T10:19:17.570+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-26T10:19:17.570+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Legal Concepts" /><title>Literal rule of statutory interpretation: The law revisited</title><content type="html">In a recent decision [B. Premanand v. Mohan Koikal] the Supreme Court has explained the literal rule of interpretation of statutes. Governing the interpretation of statutes, the literal rule is the often invoked rule pressed into action to ascertain the legislative intention behind the framing of the enactment. The rule governs and regulates the meaning of the law in as much as the rule provides that the meaning has to be ascertained from the text of the law itself. 

The Court explained the concept in the following terms;In our opinion, Rule 27(c) of the Rules is plain and clear. Hence, the literal rule of interpretation will apply to it. No doubt, equity may be in favour of the respondents because they were selected earlier, but as observed earlier, if there is a...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=GQ3ArS1l-fw:JubSoKleryA:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/GQ3ArS1l-fw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/4718837360055671347/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=4718837360055671347&amp;isPopup=true" title="3 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/4718837360055671347?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/4718837360055671347?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/GQ3ArS1l-fw/literal-rule-of-statutory.html" title="Literal rule of statutory interpretation: The law revisited" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>3</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/literal-rule-of-statutory.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0cCQX4-eCp7ImA9WhZWE0g.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-786425125692065071</id><published>2011-05-14T11:01:00.001+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-14T11:01:00.050+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-14T11:01:00.050+05:30</app:edited><title>Vague doubt no reason for deportation: High Court</title><content type="html">Having found that the deportation of an Indian citizen mid-way on his outward journey was on basis of vague and unsubstantied allegations, the Delhi High Court in a recent decision in Balwinder Singh v. Union of India imposed costs on the Ministry while also directing the allegations against the citizen to be set-aside. Being of the view that the citizen had "needlessly suffered hardship and trauma due to the arbitrary acts" of the Government, the High Court sternly noted the action to be violative of the life and personal liberty of the citizen, guaranteed by the Constitution to all citizens.

The High Court inter alia observed as under;15. The conduct of the Respondents in the present case displays utter callousness in dealing with the life and liberty of the...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nS_m6w-Qy-I:Axt6xqulJuo:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/nS_m6w-Qy-I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/786425125692065071/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=786425125692065071&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/786425125692065071?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/786425125692065071?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/nS_m6w-Qy-I/vague-doubt-no-reason-for-deportation.html" title="Vague doubt no reason for deportation: High Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/vague-doubt-no-reason-for-deportation.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;D0QCRXs9fSp7ImA9WhZVE0U.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-3102019660894960769</id><published>2011-05-12T10:54:00.003+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-26T10:19:24.565+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-26T10:19:24.565+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Company Law" /><title>No stamp-duty on increase in share capital: High Court</title><content type="html">Holding that "in the absence of a specific provision that permits the levy of stamp duty on the increase in authorized share capital", it is not open to the Government "to insist upon the Petitioner having to pay stamp duty for the increased authorized share capital" the Delhi High Court in a recent decision in S.E. Investments Ltd. v. Union of India declared that no stamp-duty was payable on increase in share-capital of a company.

The High Court declared the law in the following terms;10. Having considered the above submissions, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner ought to succeed. The order dated 11th August 2010 of the Collector of Stamps proceeds on the footing that under Article 10 (a) and (b) of Schedule IA of the Act, stamp duty chargeable on the...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=nPkU2MckfcQ:dhLN5pMrO6s:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/nPkU2MckfcQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/3102019660894960769/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=3102019660894960769&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/3102019660894960769?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/3102019660894960769?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/nPkU2MckfcQ/no-stamp-duty-on-increase-in-share.html" title="No stamp-duty on increase in share capital: High Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/no-stamp-duty-on-increase-in-share.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;Dk4DRXw9cCp7ImA9WhZWEE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-7228394013930834256</id><published>2011-05-10T10:52:00.000+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-10T10:52:54.268+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-10T10:52:54.268+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Public Interest Litigation" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Updates from Legal circles" /><title>No PIL for challenging Lok Pal Bill Committee: High Court</title><content type="html">Dismissing the public interest litigation challenging the constitution of the Lok Pal Committee Bill the Delhi High Court in a recent decision declared that there was no public interest shown to the involved in the challenge and thus the petition was dismissed at the admission stage itself. The decision, authored by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court himself, dismissed the petition filed by Hemant Baburao Patil, the President of National Anti Corruption Public Power in the following terms;6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is manifest that members of the Committee do not hold public office and, hence, there cannot be any eligibility criteria. Therefore, the concept of quo warranto is not applicable. A drafting committee has been constituted...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=oUCGTyKxxwo:4RSOuAF_Pwo:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/oUCGTyKxxwo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/7228394013930834256/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=7228394013930834256&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/7228394013930834256?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/7228394013930834256?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/oUCGTyKxxwo/no-pil-for-challenging-lok-pal-bill.html" title="No PIL for challenging Lok Pal Bill Committee: High Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/no-pil-for-challenging-lok-pal-bill.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;CUMCSXwycCp7ImA9WhZWEE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-6992388957968189433</id><published>2011-05-10T10:27:00.000+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-10T10:27:48.298+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-10T10:27:48.298+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Constitutional Law" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Law and Society" /><title>Arbitrary detention at check-posts unfair: High Court</title><content type="html">Holding that detention at check-post by the local authorities&amp;nbsp; and demanding of substantially high amounts from the holder of goods was illegal and violative of law, the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a recent decision directed release of the goods while also imposing cost on the government department. The High Court declared that "acting on one technicality or the other with a  view to harass and abuse the power of detention of vehicles and goods is  not consistent with the fair procedure required to be followed to  justify interference with the right of life and liberty of a citizen  under Article 21 of the Constitution".

The High Court inter alia observed as under;6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of detaining the goods at the...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=lxH17m-0K2c:3-toPEsLOW4:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/lxH17m-0K2c" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/6992388957968189433/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=6992388957968189433&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/6992388957968189433?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/6992388957968189433?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/lxH17m-0K2c/arbitrary-detention-at-check-posts.html" title="Arbitrary detention at check-posts unfair: High Court" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/arbitrary-detention-at-check-posts.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C08AQn8zeyp7ImA9WhZWEE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-8221337314978454675</id><published>2011-05-10T10:00:00.000+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-10T10:00:43.183+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-10T10:00:43.183+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="International Law" /><title>American hunt for Osama on Pakistani soil: Lessons from International Law</title><content type="html">While the world is celebrating that an ostensible symbol of international terrorism, Osama Bin Laden, has been captured and killed, the trail of his capture has already initiated the debate on 'State Sovereignty' and whether terrorism considerations can out-weigh the regard and scope of international state boundaries. In his paper titled Pakistan's Sovereignty and the Killing of Osama Bin Laden, Ashely S. Deeks has provided glaring insights over the issue of State Sovereignty in as much as a new theory is being developed seemingly to justify the breach of state boundaries.&amp;nbsp;

Published under the aegis of American Society of International Law (ASIL), the paper concludes as under;The facts and politics in this case make it unlikely that Pakistan’s  defense of its...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=Aohk-Ib3O9o:qMwrq6bqc-A:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/Aohk-Ib3O9o" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/8221337314978454675/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=8221337314978454675&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/8221337314978454675?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/8221337314978454675?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/Aohk-Ib3O9o/american-hunt-for-osama-on-pakistani.html" title="American hunt for Osama on Pakistani soil: Lessons from International Law" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/05/american-hunt-for-osama-on-pakistani.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C08HQnwyfip7ImA9WhZWEE0.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-2652567392957384941</id><published>2011-04-13T07:55:00.002+05:30</published><updated>2011-05-10T10:00:33.296+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-05-10T10:00:33.296+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="Legal Concepts" /><title>Evidence of child witness: The law revisited</title><content type="html">Witnesses form the backbone of a legal system. They are the assurances of the trust of the citizens in the justice dispensation system. However the quality of witness is also essential to be maintained,  on the parallel lines, or else the correctness of decisions cannot be warranted. In this context we bring to you the law relating to child witnesses. In a recent decision [State of M.P. v. Ramesh] the Supreme Court took note of its earlier decisions to explain the law relating to evidentiary value of the statements of child witnesses. 

The Court inter alia explained the law in the following terms;6. In Rameshwar S/o Kalyan Singh v. The State of Rajasthan, AIR 1952 SC 54, this Court examined the provisions of Section 5 of Indian Oaths Act, 1873 and Section 118 of...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=poZEtk2602k:bB9Y3j68FBM:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/poZEtk2602k" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/2652567392957384941/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=2652567392957384941&amp;isPopup=true" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/2652567392957384941?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/2652567392957384941?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/poZEtk2602k/evidence-of-child-witness-law-revisited.html" title="Evidence of child witness: The law revisited" /><author><name>Tarun Jain</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="32" height="24" src="http://bp3.blogger.com/_eDsFOEDwSZ4/R1UwbWqfA7I/AAAAAAAAAMA/bHRbeyAvjQU/S220/DSC00157.JPG" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/04/evidence-of-child-witness-law-revisited.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DEcMQHg-eSp7ImA9WhZTFko.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5753026395139707227.post-2080720321208440190</id><published>2011-03-21T08:11:00.009+05:30</published><updated>2011-03-21T08:24:41.651+05:30</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2011-03-21T08:24:41.651+05:30</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="IPR" /><title>Local Working Requirement of a Patent under the Indian Patent Act, 1970</title><content type="html">In this post we are bringing an expert article relating to Intellectual Property Laws on the topic 'Local Working Requirement of a Patent under the Indian Patent Act, 1970' which has been authored by a close friend and patron of this blog, Pavit Singh Katoch. Pavit holds a Masters Degree in Law with specialization in Intellectual Property Law from Queen Mary (University of London) and is currently associated with M/s Vaish Associates, Delhi. The views are personal. He can be contacted at affable [dot] sonu [at] gmail [dot] com) 

LOCAL WORKING REQUIREMENT OF A PATENT UNDER THE INDIAN PATENT ACT, 1970Introduction  The intellectual property system is based on the utilitarian principle that it promotes the progress of science and useful arts. Patent is the strongest...&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;
[ These are just the first few words of this post with lots of interesting content to follow. Visit our web-blog www.legalperspectives.blogspot.com for the full post, links and other exclusive content. ]&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:63t7Ie-LG7Y"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=63t7Ie-LG7Y" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:dnMXMwOfBR0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=dnMXMwOfBR0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:gIN9vFwOqvQ"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:TzevzKxY174"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:KwTdNBX3Jqk"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?i=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:KwTdNBX3Jqk" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?a=0X9Zm51oblA:i-3TPDZLpJw:YwkR-u9nhCs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/LawInPerspective?d=YwkR-u9nhCs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~4/0X9Zm51oblA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</content><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/feeds/2080720321208440190/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5753026395139707227&amp;postID=2080720321208440190&amp;isPopup=true" title="1 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/2080720321208440190?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5753026395139707227/posts/default/2080720321208440190?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/LawInPerspective/~3/0X9Zm51oblA/local-working-requirement-of-patent.html" title="Local Working Requirement of a Patent under the Indian Patent Act, 1970" /><author><name>Guest Blogger</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/06685107833567334496</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="16" height="16" src="http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif" /></author><thr:total>1</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://legalperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/03/local-working-requirement-of-patent.html</feedburner:origLink></entry></feed>
