Bar & Bench News Network
Showing how sensitive the Ayodhya case is proving to be, the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice S.H. Kapadia is leaving no stone unturned to convince the country of the apex court’s secular and fair credentials.
The CJI has gone ahead and replaced Justice Swatanter Kumar with Justice Aftab Alam. CJI appears to have put into practice the oft-recited adage - "Justice should not only be done, but also appear to be done”. The move is to maintain the Hindu-Muslim equation before the next date of hearing.
A 3 Judge Bench will hear the deferment petition tomorrow, after differing opinions arose after a 2 Judge Bench comprising of Justices R.V. Raveendran and H.L. Gokhale differed on entertaining the appeal. In a surprising and highly unexpected move, the Bench stopped the Allahabad High Court, with proceeding to pronounce a verdict in the 60 year title suit last week.
In another development in the contentious case, the Indian Express reports the All India Muslim Personal Law Board is likely to move the Supreme Court to oppose the application for deferment of the verdict on Ayodhya title suit by the Allahabad High Court.
"Yusuf Hatim Muchala, Mumbai based lawyer and Chairman of the legal committee of the AIMPLB, is reaching Delhi on September 27 and a decision on filing the intervention application will be taken in the meeting", said Zafaryab Jilani, counsel of the Sunni Central Waqf Board and also a member of the AIMPLB and the convenor of the Babri Masjid action committee.
|
 |
- 1. "It is pathetic as even our judiciary doesnot have the courage to declare our's is a secular state where the religion does not matters . Wounder where we are heading ,a situstioin where Hindu judges decide matters involving Hindus and Muslim judges decide matters dealing Muslims.In our country religion matters and we will take 1000/- more years to get over this dogma". Av T.Rajesh, Kochi
- 2. "Supreme Court of India is always Secular it doesn't matter Hindu or Muslim Judges at supreme Court.". Assumed Presumptions, Delhi
- 3. "[edited] you dont even have the marginal wit to realize that the panel of judges should not only be concerned about the ruling, but also with the possible aftermaths, which could very well involve another bloody communal riot. At this point our primary concern should be avoiding an outrage no matter what the ruling turns out to be. And a very viable step towards accomplishing such is convincing the crowd that the judgement was fair and without prejudice. Involving judges from both the community surely seems as the right idea.". Big Daddy, Jamnagar
- 4. "It is most unfortunate that we are fighting for Mandir and Masjid, when the nation faces many other pressing issues. Development, value of human life, economic growth, education (not only the certificates - but in real term of education to distinguish our-self & to judge the wright and wrong), work for all, internal and external security of the nation to be given importance.Not long back (1 year or so) when the world was facing the strong and worst economic downfall/crisis this nation (India) was stable and stood-up with a great hope for development and economic growth for all. Our potentials are extremely high with a capability to prove to the world that we are the fastest growing economy and a nation with highest level of tolerance and in very near future we shall prove ourselves to be admired & looked upon.Let us rise to the occasion & not fall prey to the vested interested of few politicians and other elements, for whom their own survival depends on the issue of Mandir-Masjid and many such issues they want to keep alive.". Umesh Singh, Calcutta
- 5. "the news should beof that time itself". Nishant, Banglore
Related Stories
- Justice Alam replaces Sirpurkar in Dinakaran probe panel
- "Judges have nothing to fear, nothing to hide" says Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar
- Chief Justice rebukes Justice Shylendra Kumar
- Supreme Court Justice BN Agrawal turns 65, retires
- Supreme Court Justice BN Agrawal turns 65, retires
- Recusals hit Delhi High Court: Justice Mudgal inherits HUL shares, recuses from HLL - Reckitt dispute
- Justice Syed Rafat Alam appointed as Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh HC
Other News
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
- Siddharth Wahi joins JSA as Of Counsel; Former Baker Mckenzie SA to focus on Energy Sector
- Re-Upped Round up May 16
- Bombay HC taking proactive steps to fight pendency; Special committee to examine pending civil suits for speedy disposal
- CLAT Booze Bills: NUJS defies providing information under RTI Act
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (2)
Webmasters: AIKYA