|
Legislative and Regulatory Update
|
You
now have the option of customizing
your manupatra round-up .This means that you get updates
on the areas of interest that you select .You may change your
preferences at any time you wish to. If you do not customize
your round up you will continue to get the updates on all
areas
To
customize your round-up now click here.
_____________________________________________________________________ |
|
India Centric
Online Legal & Business Database
Bringing
forth new efficiency and unparalleled results to research
efforts. |
| In This Issue |
|
[No.126]
June 30,
2005 |
|
|
|
|
To keep you informed about the latest Legislative
and Regulatory information manupatra.com
publishes this e-roundup highlighting the recent changes
brought about by the Notifications/Acts/Bills /Ordinances
etc.
About
manupatra.com
../
provides comprehensive and easy to use legal and related
information over the Internet .Our database covers Central
Laws , Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court (full
text of the judgments from 1950 onwards ), Orders of
Tribunals , Bills , Notifications, Circulars and
more
Key features of manupatra are
 |
Content is derived from reliable primary and
secondary sources |
|
Database is updated on a daily
basis |
|
Electronic Ready Reckoner to view the
judgments under a particular section of an Act /
Subject |
|
Powerful search engine with user friendly
interfaces |
|
Search in any one court/year or multiple
courts/year |
|
Hyper-linking of
documents |
|
Updated
modules on WTO, Anti Dumping, Arbitration,
Investment Destinations Abroad, Capital Markets,
Taxation, Environment, Cyber & IT Laws, IPR,
Corporate Laws, Industrial Policies, Foreign
Trade,
Forex & Banking and
more |
For subscription to manupatra.com or for more
details please log onto ../
or call us at 0120 2531811 or send an email to : contact@manupatra.com
If at any stage you wish to stop receiving the
e-roundup please click here to unsubscribe. |
|
| |
High Courts |
|
Orissa
Petitioner's marriage
dissolved by decree passed by mutual consent. In terms of the divorce his wife
withdrew her claim against the petitioner for maintenance, however the criminal
case lodged against the husband and his relatives, alleging cruelty sustained
due to dowry demand was still pending.
The matter being non
compoundable, the accused (petitioners herein) approached the High Court for
quashing of the criminal proceedings, exercising its inherent powers under
section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The Orissa High
Court, allowed the Petition, it was remarked that since the parties were
desirous of a settlement, parties should not be compelled to face the trial and
appear as witnesses.
Karnataka
The state government
entered into a contract with a company for the Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure
Corridor Project to be developed at a Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis.
Petitions filed in public interest alleging fraud by the ultimate beneficiary
company and consent of the state government in the process leading to the award
of the project.
It was alleged that
the contract was obtained by playing fraud and misrepresenting the technical
expertise possessed by the beneficiary company. Land much in excess of the
requirement was also alleged to have been acquired for the project. The
government supported the stand of the Petitioners qua the allegations of
misrepresentation.
The High Court of
Karnataka, dismissed the petitions with the remarks that the allegations of
fraud and misrepresentation were unsubstantiated. Further observed that the
company had already incurred considerable expenditure on the project. Besides,
most of the issues raised had already been decided in a previous case. In the
circumstances, the contract could not be cancelled. Senior officials were directed to
be prosecuted under sections 195 and 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
for deliberately withholding important documents from the court and for giving
false affidavits.
Madhya Pradesh
In this case, it was
alleged that false news was published in daily newspaper “Navbharat” to defame and
degrade defendant. The accused Smt. Brij Maheshwari was the Director of the
company. Owner of the newspaper ie. M/s. Ramgopal Investments Pvt. Ltd. had
leased out the press to lessee “Navbharat”.
It was held by the
court that the Owner and its Director cannot be held responsible for printing
and publishing news in “Navbharat”. The court relied on the Supreme Court
Judgment of State of Maharastra v. Dr R.B. Choudhari and Delhi High Court
judgment of S. Nihal Singh v. Shri Arjandas and held that according to provisions
of section 7 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, it is the
printer, publisher and editor who is presumed to be aware of what is being
printed and published in the newspaper.
Jharkhand
In this case,
Petitioner was a contractor of a company and work allotted to him in 1984 could
not get completed for long time. Payments were not made due to paucity of funds
and the contract finally closed in 1992. It was contended that the final bill
was prepared by the respondents in 1995 but all sum payable to the petitioner
was not included.
Protest was made
against the same to the Executive Engineer and then to the Chief Engineer. A
Panel of engineers made to look into his grievances. The petitioner did not
agree with their decision. Matter was thus referred for Arbitration by the Chief
Engineer, but the respondents did not agree to same.
Respondents filed
their counter affidavit, wherein it was stated that petitioner had suppressed
material facts in his application, as petitioner earlier filed an application
before Subordinate Court. As the matter was sub-judice, prima facie application
under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act was not sustainable.
It was held that
inspite of request made by the petitioner in 1996 for reference of the disputes
to the Arbitrator for adjudication , respondents did not refer the matter to
Arbitrator. The court held that the instant request petition after 9 years was
not maintainable as the same was s barred by limitation.
Andhra Pradesh
In this case,
petitioner was dismissed from service subsequent to departmental enquiry.
However the Industrial Tribunal did not approve such order and petitioner
reinstated into service. The petitioner claimed the privilege leave during the
period from the date of dismissal to the date of his reinstatement.
It was held in this
case that privilege leave is intended for rest and recuperation. A workman has
to render actual service to earn privilege leave. A workman out of service for
any reason whatsoever is not entitled to privilege leave.
Kerala
In this case, the
summons was issued to the petitioner for production of documents. The petitioner
had submitted before court in writing that since he had ceased to be speaker, he
is not in possession of documents. Following that submission the Magistrate had
passed Ext.P-6 order directing petitioner to appear and to give oral evidence.
In pursuance of Ext P-6 order, Ext.P-7 summons was issued .The Writ Petition was
filed challenging the Ext.P-6 order. The counter affidavit of respondent
contended that since there is no legal infirmity or factual error in Ext.P-6
order so it cannot be interfered in the proceedings. In the result the Writ
Petition is disposed of and Ext P-6 order Ext.P-7 summons were quashed.
It was held in this
case that under R.252 of the Criminal Rules of Practice summons for the
production of documents in the House of Parliament or of a Legislature of a
State shall be by a letter of request as in Form 29 .The speaker has no
discretion in this matter and he is bound to place the matter before the house
and it is for the House to take a decision and not the speaker.
Also, it was held in
this case that No Writ will issue to a court under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India. When the error pointed out is a patent error and no
elaborate discussion of evidence is necessary to consider the point the Court
has power under Code of Criminal Procedure or under Article 227 of the
Constitution to rectify the Magistrate action.
|
| Ministry of Finance |
|
CBDT
Notification No.
163/2005 Dated 17.06.2005: The Central Board of Direct Taxes has made the
Income-tax (14th Amendment) Rules, 2005, further to amend the Income-tax Rules,
1962 and by this virtue introduced Forms 15-I and 15-J. Form 15-I is for the
purpose of making declaration for non-deduction of tax at source to be furnished
to contractor under the second proviso to clause (i) of sub-section (3) of
section 194C by sub-contractor not owning more than two heavy goods
carriages/trucks during the Financial Year, while form 15-J is for the purpose
of making submission of particulars to be furnished by the Contractor under the
third proviso to clause (i) of sub-section (3) of section 194C for the Financial
Year.
Notification No.
164/2005 Dated 17.06.2005: Further to amend the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the
Central Board of Direct Taxes has made the Income-tax (15th Amendment) Rules,
2005, introducing new Forms 58-C and 58-D. Form 58-C is for the purpose of
submission of report to be submitted under clause (ii) of sub-section (4) of
section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to the National Committee by an
approved association or institution, while Form 58-D is to enable a public
sector company, local authority or an approved association or institution to
submit report under clause (ii) of sub-section (5) of section 35AC of the Income
tax Act, 1961 to the National Committee on a notified eligible project or
scheme.
Order from File No.
385/35/2005-IT (B) Dated 17.06.2005: The Central Board of Direct Taxes has
ordered an extension of the due date for filing of annual return of Tax
Collection at Source (TCS) for financial year 2004-05, wherever to be filed in
electronic format as per the provisions of section 206C (5A) & (5B), to 31st
of July, 2005, and at the same time making this day to be the due date for
filing of quarterly statements of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax
Collection at Source (TCS) for the first quarter of financial year 2005-06.
CBEC Customs
Notification No.
56/2005 Dated 23.06.2005: One of the highly used electroplating chemicals,
Sodium Cynide, will continue to be subject to anti-dumping duty. The Central
Government has expressed via this notification that on every import of Sodium
Cynide, originating in or exported from the United States of America, Czech
Republic, the European Union and Korea RP, anti-dumping duty shall be applicable
till the 26th day of December, 2005.
CBEC Customs NT
Notification No.
50/2005-NT Dated 23.06.2005: The Central Government, vide this notification, has
specified an area of 56.64 hectares in the village Sachin located in Surat
District, as special economic zone (SEZ).
|
| Ministry
of Chemicals and Fertilizers |
|
Notification No.
GSR391(E) Dated 13.06.2005: Vide this notification, the Central Government has
made the Chemical Weapons Convention Appeals Rules, 2005, which shall come into
force on the 1st day of July, 2005. These rules are intended to facilitate any
person aggrieved by any direction of the National Authority issued under section
10 of the Chemical Weapons Convention Act, 2000, to prefer an appeal to the
Central Government against such directive order, within a period of thirty days
from the receipt of such direction.
|
| Ministry
of External
Affairs |
|
Notification No.
GSR399(E) Dated 05.05.2005: The Central Government, vide the issue of this
notification, has published the Passports (Amendment) Rules, 2005, further
making amendments to the Passports Rules, 1980. The amendments relate to the
additional processing fees to be charged from the applicants making applications
for issue of out of turn (Tatkaal) Passport.
|
| Ministry of
Law and Justice |
|
Justice
Notification No.
GSR412(E) Dated 16.06.2005: With the effect of the amendments brought in by this
notification, a Judge of the High Court of Madras, shall be entitled to the
expenditure incurred by him for the transport of his wife and dependent son or
daughter, if he is required to proceed on circuit from Chennai to Madurai or
from Madurai to Chennai, provided that the duration of the circuit concerned is
not less than fifteen days at a time.
|
| Ministry
of Labour And Employment |
|
Notification No.
SO849(E) Dated 16.06.2005: The Central Government, vide this notification, has
expressed its intentions to add employment of Sweeping and Cleaning, excluding
activities prohibited under the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction
of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, to the schedule of the Minimum Wages
Act, 1948 in the Central Sphere, thereby bringing the said employment within the
realm of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
|
|
Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)
|
|
Circular No.
301/27/2005-Eco. Dated 27.06.2005: Keeping in view the prevailing system and
procedure, the Authority, in the interest of consumers, has issued a few
Directions to all the Telecom Access Providers. The credit limit set for a
post-paid subscriber shall be intimated to him in advance. The initial credit
limit shall be intimated within 7 days of activation of the service for the new
subscribers. Also, the subscriber shall be given full information in advance on
the consequences of usage and other applicable charges exceeding the credit
limit as well as the manner in which the credit limit set for them could be
enhanced.
|
| International Legal
Cases and News |
|
Cases
Environment
In a severe blow to federal
regulators and environmentalists, on appeal the Court of 4th
Circuit upheld the dismissal of lawsuit brought by the US government against
North Duke Energy Corporation, a Carolina based Power Company for violations of
the "new source review" provisions of the Clean Air Act. The new
source review provision of the Clear Air Act requires power plants, refineries
and steel mills to install new pollution controls when the facilities make
modifications that result in an increase in air pollution.
Intellectual
Property Rights
In a significant
ruling relating to copyright issues, in the landmark case of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd, the U.S. Supreme Court held that file-sharing
companies (napster) are to be blamed for piracy on their network. This landmark
judgment specifically addresses the legality of peer-to-peer Internet
file-sharing services and has broad implications for any technology that could
potentially be used to infringe copyrighted materials. The Trial Courts had held
that the defendants in the case -- Grokster and StreamCast Networks could not be
held responsible for what users do with their software, even if that includes
illegally downloading copyrighted songs, films and software products.
Civil Procedure
The California 6th
Appellate District Court in the above case held that the trial court erred when
it corrected an arbitration award under Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers in granting attorney
fees.
In the case of
Housing Auth. v. Jones, on appeal, the California 6th Appellate District Court
held that the judge who decided pretrial motions against the defendant and then
sat on the appellate division panel, which reviewed the same case, presented
before a different judge must be disqualified from the appellate division panel
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.1(b).
Criminal Law &
Procedure
In the above case it
was held by the California 3rd Appellate District Court on appeal that the trial
court erred when it found that a search of defendant's residence was illegal
since the defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the
place where the property was found.
Education
The California 5th
Appellate District Courts in the above case ruled that the school district's
exercise of its discretion in responding to a Proposition 39 facilities request
must comport with the evident purpose of the Charter Schools Act to equalize the
treatment of charter and district-run schools with respect to the allocation of
space between them.
Contract
In the above breach
of contract dispute case, the California 4th Appellate District upheld the
summary judgment in favor of defendant when the plaintiff failed to plead or
prove that it suffered any compensable loss as a result of the action of the
defendant.
News
Canadian parliament
has passed a landmark legislation allowing a same sex civil union. After
Netherlands and Belgium, Canada is the third country to legalise gay marriages.
This bill grants all gay and lesbian couples equal legal rights to those in a
traditional union between a man and a woman and is expected to become federal
law by the end of July once it passes through the Liberal-dominated senate.
Draft of amendments
to election rules has been approved on a second reading by the Russia’s
parliament. If introduced the, the proposed amendments would ban political
parties merging into blocs to stand in elections and scrap the "against
all" option, used as a protest vote, on ballot papers in regional polls.
The proposed amendments to election law come after Putin previously abolished
gubernatorial elections allowing the Kremlin to appoint regional leaders and
would functionally prohibit small parties and independent candidates from having
access to the chamber.
A new election law
allowing more than one candidate to run for president has been rejected by
Egypt's Higher Constitutional Court. The proposed law is rejected on the ground
that it is unconstitutional, and is a harsh blow to the government's efforts to
amend the election law as part of political reforms it is seeking to introduce.
Opposition parties have also opposed the law on the ground that associated
regulations imposed too many strictures on candidates who did not have the
support of members of Mubarak's National Democratic Party.
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer |
|
(1) While
all reasonable care has been taken to ensure that the
information provided in the "round up" and on the website is
fair and accurate the company and its promoters and employees
shall not in any way be responsible for the consequences of any
action taken on the basis of reliance upon the contents of this
"round up". |
|
(2) This is not a Spam
mail. You have received this mail because you have either
requested for it or someone must have suggested your name under
our various referral programs. Since India has no anti-spamming
law, we refer to the US directive, which states that a mail
cannot be considered Spam if it contains the sender's contact
information, which this mail does. In case this mail doesn't
concern you, please unsubscribe from mailing list.
Feedback
| |
