Lex Juris

25/05/2020

ईद मुबारक

11/05/2020

Alternative of CLAT.

10/05/2020

09/05/2020

*IMPORTANT PROVISION OF THE DAY*

Section 3 in The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986---Power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve environment. �

The Central Government may, if it considers it necessary or expedient so to do for the purposes of this Act, by order, published in the Official Gazette, constitute an authority or authorities by such name or names as may be specified in the order for the purpose of exercising and performing such of the powers and functions (including the power to issue directions under section (5) of the Central Government under this Act and for taking measures with respect to such of the matters referred to in sub-section (2) as may be mentioned in the order and subject to the supervision and control of the Central Government and the provisions of such order, such authority or authorities may exercise the powers or perform the functions or take the measures so mentioned in the order as if such authority or authorities had been empowered by this Act to exercise those powers or perform those functions or take such measures.

*CASE REFERENCE*

_Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v Union of India,WP 914/1991 (1996.04.26)_

The Supreme Court has directed the central government to constitute the ‘authority’ for the implementation of powers under section 3(3). Thus, the Court directed while keeping in the notice about the degrading quality of the environment that authorities should implement the ‘precautionary principle’ and ‘pollution pay principle’.

*WORD OF THE DAY*

Adscititious (adjective)--- acquired something from outside or extrinsic

*Synonyms*---- adventitious, additional, incidental

*Antonym*--- Intrinsic

*Example*---When releasing the second edition of the novel, the publisher included an *adscititious* chapter that wasn’t included the first time.

Team LexJuris*

08/05/2020

*IMPORTANT PROVISION OF THE DAY*

Section 3(4) Competition Act,2002---- Any agreement amongst enterprises or persons at different stages or levels of the production chain in different markets, in respect of production, supply, distribution, storage, sale or price of, or trade in goods or provision of services, including—

(a) tie-in arrangement;
(b) exclusive supply agreement;
(c) exclusive distribution agreement;
(d) refusal to deal;
(e) resale price maintenance, shall be an agreement in contravention of sub-section

*CASE REFERENCE*

_Sodhi Transport Co. v. State Of U.P._

The apex court has interpreted ‘shall be presumed’ as a presumption and not evidence itself, but merely indicative on whom burden of proof lies. Further, vertical agreements relating to activities referred to under Section 3(4) of the Competition Act on the other hand have to be analyzed in accordance with the rule of reason analysis under the Competition Act.
Team LexJuris*

08/05/2020

*LEGAL PHRASE*

*Boni judicis lites dirimere est*

This maxim refers that a good judge knows how to get cases settled that should be settled easily and avoiding needless litigation. It is the duty of a good judge to prevent litigations, that suit may not grow out of suit, and it concerns the welfare of a state that an end be put to litigation.

*CASE REFERENCE*

_Land acquisition officer v. Karigowda, (2010) 5 SCC 708_

In this case court held that an established maxim “Boni judicis est lites dirimere, ne lis ex lite oritur, et interest reipublicae ut sint fines litium”, casts a duty upon the Court to bring litigation to an end or at least endure that if possible, no further litigation arises from the cases pending before the Court in accordance with law. This doctrine would be applicable with greater emphasis where the judgment of the Court has attained finality before the highest Court. All other Courts should decide similar cases particularly covered cases, expeditiously and in consonance with the law of precedents.
Team LexJuris*

06/05/2020

*IMPORTANT PROVISION OF THE DAY*

Section 13 of Securities Contract (Regulations) Act, 1956--- Contracts in notified areas illegal in certain circumstances
If the Central Government is satisfied, having regard to the nature or the volume of transactions in securities in any 1[State or States or area], that it is necessary so to do, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare this section to apply to such [State or States or area] and thereupon every contract in such 1[State or States or area], which is entered into after the date of the notification otherwise than between members of a recognised stock exchange in such [State or States or area] or through or with such member shall be illegal

(i) be subject to such terms and conditions as may be stipulated by the respective stock exchanges with prior approval of Securities and Exchange Board of India;
(ii) require prior permission from the respective stock exchanges if so stipulated by the stock exchanges with prior approval of Securities and Exchange Board of India.

*CASE REFERENCE*

_Norman J Hamilton & Anr v. Umedbhai S Patel_

Court said, definition of securities means all types of securities which are marketable in nature & provision of SCRA should be accorded only to securities which can be marketable i.e., securities with high degree of liquidity

Team LexJuris*

05/05/2020

*IMPORTANT PROVISION OF THE DAY*

*Section 15L Of SEBI Act 1992----- power to adjudicate*

(1) For the purpose of adjudging under sections 15A, 15B, 15C, 15D, 15E, 15F, 15G 87[,15H, 15HA and 15HB], the Board shall appoint any officer not below the rank of a Division Chief to be an adjudicating officer for holding an inquiry in the prescribed manner after giving any person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard for the purpose of imposing any penalty.

(2) While holding an inquiry the adjudicating officer shall have power to summon and enforce the attendance of any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case to give evidence or to produce any document which in the opinion of the adjudicating officer, may be useful for or relevant to the subject-matter of the inquiry and if, on such inquiry, he is satisfied that the person has failed to comply with the provisions of any of the sections specified in sub-section (1), he may impose such penalty as he thinks fit in accordance with the provisions of any of those sections

*CASE REFERENCE*

_Cabot International Capital Corporation Vs. Adjudicating Officer, SEBI (Appeal No.24/2000 decided on 25.1.2001)_

Tribunal considered the scope of section 15L and I5J in the context of unintentional failure on the part of the Appellant. On a perusal of section 15L it could be seen that imposition of penalty is linked to the subjective satisfaction of the Adjudicating Officer. The words in the section that "he may impose such penalty" is of considerable significance, especially in view of the guidelines provided by the legislature in section I5J.
"The Adjudicating officer shall have due regard to the factors" stated in the section is a direction and not an option. It is not incumbent on the part of the Adjudicating officer, even if it is established that the person has failed to comply with the provisions of any of the sections specified in sub-section 1 of section 15L, to impose penalty. It is left to the discretion of the Adjudicating Officer, depending on the facts and circumstances of each case
Team LexJuris*

04/05/2020

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd4nnzeDshjKJR2A4svip4GeOJ0Uuri4zgE3tOZu6yW0fV2Vw/viewform?usp=sf_link , Do register and gain information and your skills