Common Law

I am talking about Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Although, malice cannot be attributed towards the Legislature, nevertheless, it is an Act, the provisions of which grossly frustrate the most cherished personal liberty of men and women, is destroying the institution of family in our Country, apart from subjecting people of this country to one of the most irrational and unjust law. The Act sought to handover a potent weapon in the hands of an abusive litigant to intimidate and harass their family members, allows the litigant wife to lie with fluency and fervor, and legitimizes the gross misuse of the law. The whole procedure contemplated under the Act is designed in such a manner that would cause “undue” fatigue and oppression to the matrimonial family members of the Wife. There is an illogical consistency in the entire scheme of the Act, and the innocent family members may never recover from confusion. The serious anomalies in the Act begin from t...

A new remedy under “The Real Estate (Regulation & Development), Act, 2016”, is introduced for Buyers of Immovable properties. The present write up is limited to those properties which are situate in the State of Maharashtra. Who can maintain complaint before RERA Authority / Adjudicating officer: All persons (Buyers / Allottee) who have purchased Flat, etc, (even prior to the coming into operation of this Act) in such Real Estate Projects which are required to be compulsorily registered, are entitled to maintain complaint before Competent Authority / Adjudicating officer established under the Act by the State Govt. The Buyer will include such transferee who acquires the said Flat, etc. by way of transfer or sale, but will not include such persons who are lessee or Licensee. This is very important, that is to say, “All Real Estate Projects are required to be compulsorily registered u/s 3 of the Act, which have not received “Completion certificate” from the competent / local ...

What are provisions of law which deals with False Complaints: It is a Criminal offence under sections 182 and 211 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 to knowingly make / record a false complaint / accusation against any person before any Public authority / Police. Section 182 of IPC states that a person commits an offence when he records a complaint before any public servant, being aware of that the complaint which he is making is false; and that by making such false complaint, the said Public Servant would exercise his powers to the injury or annoyance of the said person. In law, the injury implies any harm, illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property. Section 211 of IPC states that a person commits an offence when he, with the intention to cause injury to a person, knowingly, and without any just or lawful grounds, initiate any criminal proceeding, or makes a false accusation of offence against him, whether before Police or before any Court of law....

What is Perjury: Perjury proceedings are legal action against those persons who have had intentionally made false statements / had led false evidence in the Court proceedings; or have tempered with the documents which were in the custody of the Court. What offences are covered under Perjury: (1) Intentionally making of false statement, the statement either orally or in written, and when such statement is given as evidence to prove a particular fact. IPC S.191. (2) Making a document containing a false statement, or, by making false entry in any book or record, or, by creating fake circumstances, and giving the said document containing the false statement or entry as evidence to prove a particular fact. IPC S.192. (3) Knowingly using false evidence, as genuine evidence. It would include such cases where the person although is not involved in fabricating false documents, yet tender those false documents in evidence knowing well that the said documents are false. IPC S.196. (4) K...

Orders are passed by Civil Courts, Criminal Courts, various Statutory Tribunals, and Special Courts, Quasi judicial and Administrative bodies. In this write up, I am excited to share an Apex Court ruling which in my view takes away the whimsical “discretion” of the judges in deciding cases, and puts obligation upon judges to record findings in support of their decisions. Apex Court decision: The Apex Court in a case before it [(2006) 9 SCC 222], set aside the Order passed by the High Court on the grounds that the High Court failed to record finding in support of its decision. It was a case where the Defendant in a Suit gave undertaking to the trial Court that Defendants will not interfere with the possession of the Plaintiff’s land. The Suit was disposed of on the basis of above undertaking. Thereafter, the Plaintiff moved Execution Application under O.21 R.32 before the trial Court alleging that Defendants have constructed some structure on the Suit land. The trial Court dism...