Category: Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14, 19 (1) (a), 19 (1) (c) and 21 – Organisation of political nature – Any organisation which habitually engages itself in or employs common methods of political action like ‘bandh’ or ‘hartal’ ,’rasta roko’, ‘rail roko’ or ‘jail bharo’ in support of public causes can also be declared as an organisation of political nature, according to the guideline prescribed in Rule 3 (vi) – Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM (INSAF) — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ. )…

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 370 and 370(2) – Abrogation of Article 370 – Refering the issue of scrapping Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir to a larger bench – There is no conflict between the judgments in the Prem Nath Kaul v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1959 SC 749 and the Sampat Prakash v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1970 SC 1118 – Plea of the counsel to refer the present matter to a larger Bench is rejected.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH DR. SHAH FAESAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, R.…

Boycott Of Courts Can’t Be Justified As Freedom Of Speech & Expression : SC On Lawyers’ Strikes HELD “To go on strike/boycott courts cannot be justified under the guise of the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Nobody has the right to go on strike/boycott courts. Even, such a right, if any, cannot affect the rights of others and more particularly, the right of Speedy Justice guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution”,

Boycott Of Courts Can’t Be Justified As Freedom Of Speech & Expression : SC On Lawyers’ Strikes [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 28 Feb 2020 5:11 PM The Supreme Court…

You missed

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Sections 166, 168 — Compensation — Assessment of annual income of deceased/claimant on the basis of Income Tax Returns — Whether the ITR of the previous year alone, or the average of the previous two/three years, is to be taken — Held, no hard and fast formula governs computation of annual income; ITRs, being statutory documents, are an important reference point, but a bifurcation must be made between salaried and self-employed individuals — (i) For salaried individuals, the ITR of the previous year alone ordinarily suffices, since the financial impact of a promotion or salary revision is best reflected in that year’s return; where the deceased had not completed a year in a promoted position, or had not filed a return for that period, the Court may rely on the promotion letter and other corroborative financial statements; (ii) For self-employed persons/those running their own business, the average of the ITRs for up to the previous three years is to be taken as the reference point, having regard to the inherent income fluctuation in such professions — In assessing self-employed income, the surrounding circumstances to be additionally considered include: (a) the nature of the business (including geography and category); (b) its growth pattern and the impact of the death on the business; (c) its potential/future growth, including capital-intensive businesses profitable only at scale; (d) the possibility of negative income in initial years not reflecting the true financial standing; and (e) any other relevant factor — The date of filing of an ITR is also relevant, since income may be inflated after the death/injury; such returns call for closer scrutiny against surrounding financial statements, though they are not to be excluded outright merely for being filed post-death, if adequately supported.