About Lexpeeps

Lexpeeps established in 2019 as Lexpeeps Pvt. Ltd; is totally dedicated to the legal fraternity, where the law professionals and budding lawyers get an opportunity to flourish their career in a better way by availing different services offered by us. Lexpeeps organises different legal events like Debates, Seminars/ Webinars. Moot Courts of its own and also organises the major law school activities on tie-up with leading law schools across the country.

Lexpeeps is not only limited to managing the legal events, but it also provides other services like internship assistance and courses to law students where the law professionals come in touch with each other and grow mutually by associating with the company. Lexpeeps is one click destination which provides free access to more than 500 scholarly legal articles, Recent News Articles, Case Analysis, Interviews with eminent personalities etc.

About the Competition

Lexpeeps.in is organizing the 1st National Article Writing Competition with the aim to boost Research and Writing Skills among the students.

The competition is open only for law students and legal professionals. This is an online competition. All the entries shall be submitted in the registration form itself.

Eligibility

  • The competition is open for all law students pursuing 5 year integrated program or 3 year law program or postgraduate law degree from any recognised university/college/Institution in India.
  • Any Advocate or Legal Professional
  • A person can submit only one entry. Multiple entries will amount to disqualification.
  • Multiple entries from the same college is permitted.

Prizes

Winner: ₹2100 + Internship Opportunity with Lexpeeps + Publication of Article at Lexpeeps Blog 

Top 3 Winners: Internship Opportunity with Lexpeeps + Publication of Article at Lexpeeps Blog 

Top 10 entries will be published on Lexpeeps Blog (Will get the publication certificate).

E-certificate to every participant

Submission Guidelines

  • The article submitted must be the original author of the participant, plagiarism limit is 15%, exceeding the plagiarism limit will amount to automatic disqualification of the participant and no certificate shall be issued.
  • Co-Authorship up to only two allowed
  • Article must be written in the English language only
  • Articles should not be previously published anywhere and also should not be submitted anywhere else for publication.
  • Submission of article shall be made in .DOCX format only (to be attached in the registration form itself).
  • All the entries shall be the exclusive property of the Lexpeeps
  • Word Limit: Short Articles- 1500-2000; Long Articles: 2500-3000
  • Cover Page of the submission must include the following:
  1. Topic of the Article
  2. Name(s) of the Participant(s)
  3. Name of College/University/Institution
  4. Course and Year
  5. Email I’d and Mobile Number
  • Decision of Organisers in deciding the winners shall be final and binding. No query, correspondence in this regard shall be entertained. 

Formatting Guidelines

  • Heading: Size14, Times New Roman, Bold
  • Sub Heading: Size 12, Times New Roman, Bold
  • Body: Size 12, Times New Roman
  • Footnotes: Size 10, Times New Roman
  • The author may follow any form of Uniform Identifiable Citation Style. However, the citation standard and style followed must remain uniform throughout the submission made. 
  • Alignment must be justified and line spacing must be set at 1.5.

Important Date

Last Date of Submission of Article: 31st December 2020

Registration Details

Entry fee for Single Author:  Rs 50/- 

Co-authorship up to 2 Participants: Rs 100/-

To register for the Article Writing Competition, Click Here.

Mode of Payment UPI PAYMENT 

Mobile No 8340132731

Kindly take the screenshot of the payment receipt in order to attach it to the registration form.

Topic

  • Any contemporary legal issue.

For Queries Contact

Nidhi Chhillar: 9729793238

Aishwarya Rathaur: 7091826512

Or mail us at: lexpeeps.in@gmail.com

About Path Lexis

Path Lexis is a Youth Organization Specializing in Organizing Moot Courts, Debates, Seminars and Other Legal Competitions for a much better learning experience than What is Offered to The Law Students. Driven by a sense of Excellence and Talent in the young Minds, a Variety of mediums are provided to help Students Achieve perfectionism in every domain of the Legal Field. 

The Vision at Path Lexis is based around equality of Opportunity in the field of Law. By creating a Community of Law Students, all Students are delivered an equal shot at growing and learning. Every person is a manifestation of their past experiences, upbringing and the socioeconomic backgrounds and Path Lexis transcends such barriers. 

About the Competition 

Path Lexis is not just the academic aspect, but a combination of both the practical and the academic world. We at Path Lexis are bringing to you a Case Note Competition, which provides the best of both worlds. 

Supreme Court Judgements for the Competition have shaped the Legal Jurisprudence of Indian Civil Laws as we know it. 

This Case Note Competition seeks to promote original thought and analysis amongst students, researchers, academicians and Legal practitioners.  

Eligibility 

  • Online Events 
  • Aforesaid Competition is open to all Law Students, Researchers, Academicians, and Legal Practitioners.
  • Co-authorship is allowed.

Submission Guidelines 

  • Words Limits: 750-1000 (excluding Footnotes)
  • Format: Doc. Or Docx.
  • Font: Times New Roman 
  • Font Size: 14 for Headings,12 for text and 10 for Footnotes
  • Line Spacing: 1.5 for text and 1 for footnotes
  • Alignment; Justified
  • Margin: One inch each side
  • Citation: Bluebook 19th Edition 
  • Language: English Only

List of Case for Case Note (Choose Any One)

  1. Labour Law: – Dr. Pooja jignesh Doshi v/s State of Maharashtra and another (Writ Petition no. 1665 of 2015 decided on 3 July 2019.
  2. Hindu Law:- Bhaurao Shankar Lokhade v/s State of Maharashtra (1965 SC)
  3. Administrative Law:- A.k. Kraipak v/s Union of India 
  4. Civil Procedure Law:- Swapnil Tripathi v/s Union of State (1951 SC)
  5. Corporate Law:- Salomon v/s Salomon & Co. Ltd. (1896)
  6. Environmental Law :- M.C. Mehta V/s Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case)
  7. Constitutional Law:- Vishaka v/s State of Rajasthan (1997)
  • Last Date of Registration: 30th November 2020
  • Last Date of Submission: 5th December  2020
  • Declaration of Result: 15th December 2020

Guidelines

  • The work must be original, and on plagiarism count, more than 10% will lead to disqualification.
  • The submission shall have the following- facts of the case, reasoning, disposition and critical analysis of the judgment.
  • The name of the author/s shall be mentioned inside the file, as a footnote.
  • Only a maximum of 2 authors are allowed.
  • Submission at – info.pathlexis@gmail.com 

Awards and Prizes 

  • 1st Position – 1500 INR + Certificate of Excellence +Post of case comments on website + Free Certificate Courses on Cyber Law and Arbitration & Conciliation
  • 2nd Position – 1000 INR + Certificate of Merit +  Post of case comments on website + Free Certificate Courses on Cyber Law and Arbitration & Conciliation
  • 3rd Position – 500 INR + Certificate of Merit +  Post of case comments on website + Free Certificate Courses on Cyber Law and Arbitration & Conciliation 
  • Certificate of Merit to top 10 Participants + 50% of on Certificate Course on Cyber Law and Arbitration  & Conciliation
  • E-Certificate to all 

Payment Details and Registration Fee:- 

Registration Fees

  • Registration fees for Single Author: Rs. 100/-
  • Registration fees for Co-Author: Rs. 150/-
  • Payment modes available: Paytm/Google Pay/Phone Pay :- 7023627441 
  • Select Single Author or Co-Author as per the requirement.

Registration Link: – https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfclLrOVGzBiH22nVX-7FfLF7LNCqgxtb3FvyHm8PMaEPMZ6g/viewform?usp=sf_link 

Contact: – 7688879430, 7023627441 

This article is written by Madhur Smriti Sharma, ICFAI Law School, Hyderabad.

INTRODUCTION

The Law of proof is outlined as a system of rules for ascertaining controverted queries of truth in judicial inquiries. It bears a similar relevancy to a judicial investigation as logic for reasoning. In Law of evidence, we have a tendency to study regarding numerous kinds of evidence and proofs, applicable and valid within the court of law. Further, the item of each proceeding is that the social control of some right or liability that invariably depends upon binding facts. The substantive law, whether or not or not its civil law or common law, simply defines what facts attend represent a right or liability. Before a court will pronounce on the existence of a right or liability, it should ascertain the facts that, in line with the rule of substantive law applicable to the case, area unit the required constituents of that right or liability. This duty of ascertaining the facts that area unit the essential components of a right of liability is that the primary, and maybe the foremost tough, operate of the court. The inquiry into these facts is regulated by a group of rules and principles that blow over the name of “Law of Evidence”. The primary task of a court is to determine the facts, the principles by which the inquiry before him is regulated mustn’t, in their fundamentals, dissent from those of that the other seeker once truth regulates his inquiries. 

Historically, the Law of evidence, perhaps delineates as the child of the legal system. It absolutely was born, and has developed, with this ancient Anglo-Saxon establishment and remains nowadays as a characteristic feature of the system of communicator countries as, quite recently, the legal system of their judicial organizations. It’s going to be remarked as the terrible kick-off that the Indian Evidence Act, that was written by Sir James Fitzjames author, the distinguished jurist and politician, may be a distinctive piece of legislation that isn’t to be found anyplace else within the world. Within the symmetry of its structure, within the clearness and also the fullness of its outline, within the expressive style of its expressions, and within the compactness of its subject-matter, the work stands out incomparable and incomparable. a plan of the concision and comprehensive of the work is also forms by the actual fact that within the 167 principally single sentenced sections of the Act, the framer has compressed a subject-matter that covers some 6000 closely written pages of the work of the American author, and yet, throughout over hundred years that the Act has been operative, no necessary modification of principle or detail has been deemed necessary, and few question of proof has ever arisen that an answer in these 167 sections has not been found.

Scheme of the Evidence Act

The Act is split into 3 main parts;

1. Relevancy of facts

2. Proof

3. Production and result of proof

Part one of the IEA, is concerned with defining what facts are also given obvious so as to prove the actual fact in issue. This can be the subject-matter of chapter two of the Act consisting of starting from section six to fifty five. The fiftieth section which can be delineated because the cornerstone of the structure of half one specifies the actual fact which will tend within the proof. For the aim, truths are a unit divided into (1) truths in issue and (2) relevant fact each of those categories of fact having been antecedent outlined in section three. The excellence between truths in issue and relevant fact may be a basic one and should be completely comprehend to know and appreciate the total structure of the Act. Each right or liability that becomes the topic of legal proceeding, perpetually depends upon bound facts. 

The proof Act specifies five instances of affiliation which can exist between the evidentiary truth and also the truth to be tried, so as to create the previous relevant;

1. Facts connected with the actual fact to be proved- sections 6-16

2. Statements regarding the actual fact to be proved- sections 17-39

3. Choices regarding the actual fact to be proved- sections 40-44

4. Opinions regarding the actual fact to be proved- sections 45-51

5. Character of the persons WHO area unit involved with the actual fact to be proved- sections 52-55

Part II of the IEA deals with the mode of proof. It consists of four chapters containing forty five sections. It deals with;

1. Judicial notice

2. Oral proof

3. Documents

4. Categories of documents

5. Writings, once exclusive

6. Principles of provisions in documentary proof

Part III of the IEA deals with the topic of ‘Production of Evidence’. This half contains three chapters and sixty seven sections.

History of the Law of the Evidence

The enactment of Indian Evidence Act was a landmark judicial measure in Indian History as the entire system of concepts refers to the acceptability of the law. Before passing of the Act there was no single exhaustive code containing the law of evidence of uniform application in the country. The rules of evidence were different in case of different individuals based on different social groups and communities of India, as well as his or her caste, religion and social faith. In the three Presidency towns of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay the courts followed the English rules of evidence. Outside the presidency towns, on the other hand, as there were no definite rules relating to law of evidence, the mofussil courts enjoyed unregulated liberty in the matter of admission of evidence. The administration of justice in the mofussil courts was in chaos. Later on, some regulations and enactments were passed. Act 11 of 1855 partially codified the law of evidence in its application to courts both in the Mofussil and in the Presidency towns. By the time the Act was passed a vast body of ‘customary rules’, mainly derived from English law, had developed chaotically. A need to replace the chaos by a code was felt and in 1868 Mr. Henry Maine prepared a draft of the Law of Evidence. It was discarded as not suited to Indian conditions. Later in 1870, the task of codification of the rules of evidence was handed over to Sir James Fitzjames Stephen. In 1871, Mr. James Stephen made a new draft which became Act 1 of 1872. Though the Act is a consolidating statute, yet it is not exhaustive. In addition to the general rules of evidence provided in the Act, there are other rules of evidence relating to special subjects contained in other enactments, e.g. section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 66(2) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, created new presumptions against the accused. Now it is not open to the Courts to apply principles of equity, justice and good conscience, in the matters of evidence nor can they admit irregular evidence to throw light upon the issue. The principles of exclusion of evidence laid down in the Act must be strictly applied and cannot be relaxed at the discretion of the court as said in the case of Union of India v. T.R. Verma; AIR 1957 SC 882. 

The Act is mainly based on Taylor’s Evidence. 

Lex Fori or Rule of the Place of Trial

The Evidence Act being an adjective law, all questions of evidence must be decided according to the law of the forum in which the action is tried. Even where evidence is taken on commission or otherwise from abroad, its admissibility is determined by the law of evidence of the country where the action is being tried. The law of evidence is therefore, Lex Fori, i.e. the law of the place where the question arises. The evidence is essentially procedural law with overtones of substantive law in certain respects. 

Evidence and Procedural Legislation

Procedural law is that branch which governs the process of litigation. Trial process of criminal or civil laws in India are ruled by three pillars;

  1. The Indian Penal Code, 1960
  2. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
  3. Indian Evidence Act, 1872

CRPC/CPC is a comprehensive procedural law for running any case. This procedure includes the assembly of evidence, interrogation of accused, etc. Origin of evidence/proof can be anything including inspection of witnesses. Procedural law includes investigation, where evidence is of greatest value. The evidence can even be electronic. Evidence is usually classified as Oral, Documentary and real. Oral proof can be the declarations made by the eyewitnesses in a court. Documents produced before the court of law for examination are taken into account as Documentary proof. In judicial proceedings, objects produced in a court are the real evidence. All the three evidence can be produced in the court in order to reach the correct conclusion and based on the extent of the case. Email, text, cell phone recordings, etc. are also admissible in the court as evidence. Evidence is for the purpose of proving or disproving something (the alleged fact) before the court of law. In India, production of “evidence” is regulated by The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is one of the pillars for conducting trials.

Evidence and Substantive Litigation

After the hearing is conducted, evidence in substantive law is used to control the nature of the case and settle the matter. Elements i.e. substance of the case are defined by the substantive law 

CONCLUSION

Without evidence, it is hard to conduct the trial and decide the case. It is difficult to prove/disprove the suspected fact or issue under the dispute, prove the suspect guilty/not-guilty. Hence, evidence plays a significant part at every phase during a trial or in deciding the case.

Latest Posts


Archives

About the Organisation

Together We Can. We Will !! a non-governmental organisation (NGO), known for the Welfare of the underprivileged and conducting law seminars and conferences across the country are organising a NATIONAL LEVEL ONLINE QUIZ on general studies of Law.

About Quiz

TOGETHER – We Can. We Will !! Comes up with it’s third National Online Quiz Competition. The 30 minutes quiz will consist of questions on “General Science (Law)”. For every correct answer, the student will get one mark, and there will be no negative marking.

Prizes

Cash prizes:

Winner – ₹10k
1st Runner up – ₹5k
2nd Runner up – ₹3k

Participation certificate to all.

Eligibility

No such eligibility requirement any person having an interest in “Law” can take part in the quiz.
Location: Online, we will share a link containing all the questions which can be accessed on any smartphone as well as on desktops.

Date: 20th December 2020

Registration Details

Register Here

Contact

+91-8130773086

+91-9654650071

ABOUT US:

Lexpeeps established in 2019 as Lexpeeps Pvt. Ltd; is totally dedicated to the legal fraternity, where, the law professionals and budding lawyers get an opportunity to flourish their career in a better way by availing different services offered by us. Lexpeeps organises different legal events like Debates, Seminars/ Webinars. Moot Courts of its own and also organises the major law school activities on tie-up with leading law schools across the country. Lexpeeps is looking for interns for winter session which will start immediately from December 1st.
The mode of the internship will be online and work from home with flexible working hours. The interns will be rewarded with Certificate of completion and Best interns will be rewarded with a certificate of appreciation.

Lexpeeps Winter Intership Programme for Students

Now Everyone will get an opportunity of Internship-

1. Subject Matter Content Creator

2. Legal News Story Writer

3.Marketing & Sales

4.Graphic Designer

5.Video Editor

6.Meme Creator

7.Legal Research Intern

8. Website Content Team 

Eligibility

The internship programme is open for law students (studying in any year of either 5 years or 3 years course)/ pursuing LLM / or a law graduate willing to learn) for the position of Subject Matter Content Creator, Legal News Story Writer, Legal Research Intern.

The students of all the streams can apply for internship who are passioante to learn.

PERKS

• Letter of Recommendation to Best Interns & chance to associate as long term member.

• Internship Certificate on Successful Completion

• Discounts on Lexpeeps Exclusive Events and Courses

Registration

Registration form:-

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScwHfxhRjPdVU3UveTlxEWWSGOfAT170bPhvQYuQjL8rMTvvg/viewform?usp=sf_link

Tenure Of Internship-

Minimum 90 Days.

Work from Home ,Flexible Working Hours

*This is an unpaid program.

Contact Us

For any Query Regarding this Mail us:querieslexpeeps@gmail.com 

Keep Visiting :Lexpeeps.in

This article is written by Gaurav Purohit, a 3rd Year student of Amity University, Rajasthan

INTRODUCTION

An investor is an individual who allots capital with the desire for a financial return. There are various types of investors, for example, sweat equity investors, angel investors, venture capital, etc

Sweat equity has been utilized to depict a party’s contribution to a venture as efforts, instead of financial equity which is a contribution as capital. The parties contributing to his efforts are known as Sweat Equity Investors. In a partnership, a few partners may add to the firm just capital, and others just sweat equity.

An angel investor and also known as a business angel is a person with huge monetary assets or financial resources who gives capital to a business start-up. Generally, such investors give capital in exchange for a percentage of return on his investment or for ownership in the management decisions of the company. Angels ordinarily contribute their assets, not at all like venture capitalists who deal with the pooled money of others in a professionally managed store.

Different provisions have been specified under the Companies Act, 2013 for the security and protection of the Investors. Since the Companies Bill, 2012 got the consent of the President of India on the 29th August 2013 and was published in the Gazette on 30th August 2013, the Companies Act, 2013 came into power from 30th August 2013. Accordingly, the Companies Act, 1956 is abrogated by the Companies Act, 2013, and hence the provisions under the Companies Act, 2013 will apply to all the Companies.

Investors are generally known as shareholders or members of the company. They contribute to the equity share capital, have the right of voting in each issue, and are qualified for getting the dividend. The security of investors implies the protection and enforcement of the rights and claims of an individual in his role as an investor.640

 Investors or Speculators are the insiders of the organization. They are known as investors or the members of the company. It is to be noticed that all individuals may not be investors, however, all investors are members of the company. Section 41 of the Companies Act, 1956 gives that member incorporates the subscriber of the memorandum of a company, each other individual who agrees recorded as a hard copy to turn into a member of a company and whose name is entered in its register of members, and each individual holding equity share capital of an organization and whose name is registered as a beneficial owner in the records of the depository. Section 2(55) of the Companies Act, 2013 accommodates the meaning of member which is the same as that given under S. 41 of the Companies Act, 1956.

Provisions for Protection of Creditors and Shareholders

  1. Section 62 of the Companies Act, 1956 sets down civil liability for error or misstatement in the prospectus. Where a prospectus welcomes people to buy shares in or debentures of a company, the director, promoter ( and individual who has approved the issue of the prospectus, will be obligated to pay to each individual who buys any share or debentures on the faith of the prospectus for any losses or damage he may have supported because of any false statement included in that. Any individual who has bought in for shares against the public issue and sustained losses or damage because of such error is qualified for relief under this particular section.
  2. Section 63 of the Companies Act, 1956 sets down criminal liability for fraud or misrepresentation in the prospectus. Each individual who has approved the issue of the prospectus containing any false statements will be punishable with imprisonment which may extend out to two years, or with a fine which may extend out to Rs. 50,000 or both.
  3. Section 34 of the Companies Act, 2013 gives that where a prospectus contains any explanation which is false or misleading in structure or context in which it is incorporated or where any consideration or exclusion of any issue is probably going to mislead, then each individual who approves the issue of such prospectus will be punished with imprisonment for a term which will be at least 6 months however which may extend out to 10 years and will likewise be subject to a fine which will not be not exactly the amount associated with the fraud, yet which may extend out to 3  times the amount involved in the fraud.[1]
  4. Section 88(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 gives that each organization will keep a register of individuals showing independently for each class of equity and preference shares held by every member living in or outside India.
  5. Section 88 (5) gives punishment to default in maintaining such Register. if an organization doesn’t keep a register of members, the organization and each official of the organization who is in default will be punished with a fine which will be a minimum of Rs. 50,000 however which may extend out to Rs. 3 lakh and where the failure is a continuing one, with a further fine which may extend out to Rs. 1,000 per day afterward.
  6. The corresponding section of the Companies Act, 1956 in Section 150. If there should be an occurrence of default in keeping up the register of its members, the organization and each official of the organization who is in default will be punishable with a fine which may be extended out to Rs. 500 for every day during which the default proceeds.

Other Key Provisions for Protection of Investors

  • Restriction on forwarding dealings in Securities of the organization by a key managerial personnel
  • Restriction or Prohibition on insider trading of securities of 
  • Casting a vote through electronic methods
  • No mid-night Annual regular meeting – The hour of calling of AGM has been determined to be in  hours of business,
  • A quorum of Meetings – fixed according to the membership base of the Company rather than determined number regardless of size.
  • Minutes of procedures of meeting, a meeting of Board of Directors and other meetings and resolutions passed  postal ballot
  • Maintenance and examination of documents in electronic form

Role of Courts in Protection of Shareholders and Creditors

  • The official courtroom ensures the interests of creditors and investors under the creditor protection law.
  • The Court utilizes the process of the enactment by the legislation to assist the creditors with the clearing of the amount of debt through the insurance agencies.
  • The investors are additionally secured by the court of law for maintaining the standard of living.
  • There are different strategies by which the investors can return the money to the creditors as given by the courts.

Case Laws

  • In R. v. Lord Kylsant[2], a table was set out in the prospectus indicating that the organization had paid dividends fluctuating from 8 to 10 percent in the former years, aside from two years where no dividend was paid. The announcement indicated that the organization was in a sound financial position yet the fact of the matter was that the organization had generous trading losses during the seven years going before the date of a prospectus and the dividend had been paid, not out of the current income, yet out of the assets which had been acquired during the abnormal time of war. The prospectus was held to be false because of the oversight of the reality which was important to appreciate the statement made in the prospectus.
  • In Glass v. Atkin[3] an organization was controlled similarly by two plaintiffs and defendants. The two plaintiffs brought an action against the defendants charging that they had fraudulently converted the resources of the organization for their advantage. The court permitted the action and saw that ordinarily, it is for the organization itself to bring an action where its advantage is unfavorably influenced, however in the case the two plaintiffs were justified in bringing the action for the benefit of the organization since the two defendants being in equal control would effortlessly prevent the organization from suing. 
  • In Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Company Law Board[4] the Supreme Court saw that regardless of whether the appellants have attempted to buy shares to get a controlling interest in the Company, that itself can’t be a ground for declining to transfer the shares except if and until it tends to be proved that the buyers are undesirable persons and after overseeing the Company, they will act against the Company and interest of shareholders. 
  • In Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Securities And Exchange Board of India[5] Reliance Industries Limited, had been holding more than 5 percent shares in the target company, Larsen and Toubro Limited since 1988-89 and had been having two of its agents working as Non-Executive Directors on the Board of Directors of L&T. Securities and Exchange Board of India informed the  Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers Regulations, 1994 requiring disclosure of holdings over 5 percent. RIL kept on buying the portions of L&T in the securities market because its shareholding came to as high as 10.98 percent. The Court held that the appealing party RIL was under a duty or an obligation under Regulation 7 to inform the target company about its shareholding having exceeded 5 percent.
  • In Bharat Insurance Co. v. Kanhaiya Lal[6], one of the objects of the company was to advance money at interest on the security of land, houses, machinery, and other property located in India”. One investor brought an action on the ground that few ventures had been made by the organization without satisfactory security and in opposition to the provisions of the memorandum. The Court held that he could sue because as it was ultra vires act, the majority rule doesn’t come into operation.
  • In Brown v. English Abrasive Wheel Co[7] the articles were altered to empower the nine-tenths of the investors to compel any investor to sell his shares to them at a reasonable value. The goal of modifying the articles was not upheld because it was in the interest of the majority and not in the interest of the organization in general. The object of such resolution was just to empower the majority to obtain the shares of the minority.
  • The Apex Court in Life Insurance Cooperation of India V. Escorts Ltd. and others[8] observe certain essential rights of investors which are as per the following:
  • To choose directors and to participate in the administration through them.
  • To enjoy the profit of the company in form of dividends.
  • To apply to the court for relief in the event of abuse and mismanagement.
  • To apply to the court for winding up of the organization.
  • To share the surplus on winding up of the organization.
  • In H.V. Jayaram v. Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd[9]. [xviii], where the certificate of shares was sent to the buyer of shares by post as mentioned by him, the Supreme Court has decided that where an offense punishable under Section 113 (2) of the Companies Act, 1956 has been committed, the cause for action emerges where the head office of the organization is situated and not where the buyer resides. A complaint can be recorded only where the registered office of the company is situated. The Court held that since the organization had dispatched the certificate of shares to the buyer by post, there was no default on its part as respects compliance of the provisions of Section 113(1) and in this manner, there was no merit in appeal and appeal was dismissed by the apex court.

CONCLUSION

Although few provisions were given under the Companies Act, 1956 for protection of the interests of the investors, it didn’t stay up with the dynamic business environment. The new Companies Act tends to a few speculators or investors’ concerns and seeks to give a more hospitable climate to minority investors particularly in the wake of different scandals and scams.

 After analysis of different provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, it tends to be inferred that Legislation has made effective and affirmative steps to secure the interest of the shareholders. Since investor’s commitment is fundamental in raising funds by the company care must be taken to address their needs and necessities. Notwithstanding, the investor’s onus of proof of their dependence on the prospectus, and the damage or loss being brought about by the false statements which were included in the prospectus, are obstructions to the recovery of compensation for their interests in an IPO. But such provisions are fundamental to adjust the interest of the Company and the shareholders.

REFERENCES

  • http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1560/Protection-of-the-interest-of-the-investor.html
  • Companies Act 1956
  • Companies Act 2013
  • https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/investors-protection/.
  • https://taxguru.in/sebi/investor-protection-role-of-the-securities-appellate-tribunal.html.

[1] Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

[2] In R. v. Lord Kylsant (1932) K.B. 442.

[3] Glass v. Atkin (1967) 65 DLR 501

[4] Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Company Law Board AIR 1999 SC 345.

[5] Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Securities And Exchange Board of India 2004 55 SCL 81 SAT.

[6] Bharat Insurance Co. v. Kanhaiya Lal AIR 1935 Lah. 792.

[7] Brown v. English Abrasive Wheel Co (1919) 1 Ch. 290

[8] Life Insurance Cooperation of India V. Escorts Ltd. and others (1986)1 SCC 264.

[9] H .V. Jayaram v. Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd AIR 2000 SC 579.

Latest Posts


Archives

ABOUT ALL INDIA LEGAL FORUM:

All India Legal Forum is a dream online platform which aims at proliferating legal knowledge and providing an ingenious understanding and cognizance of various fields of law, simultaneously aiming to generate diverse social, political, legal and constitutional discourse on law-related topics, making sure that legal knowledge penetrates to every nook and corner of the ever-growing legal fraternity. It also provides a valuable contemporary assessment of issues and developments in the legal field, putting forward quality legal content for the masses. 

PEOPLE BEHIND AILF:

All India Legal Forum is a team of more than 150 law students across the country to tackle basic problems which a legal researcher faces in day to day life. Our honorary board consists of Justice A.K Sikri, eminent jurist and an international judge of the SICC; Advocate JLN. Murthy who is the Vice Chair of the American Bar Association of the United States and International Organizations; International lawyer, CEO and Managing Partner, Surana & Surana International Attorneys, Justice M.K. Sharma, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, SL. Bhayana, Senior Advocate the Supreme Court of India, Justice Amarnath Jindal, Justice; Sr. Adv. Amit Trivedi practising in Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench, Lucknow; Sr. Adv. Dhruvin. U. Mehta, Gujarat High Court member and many more.   

POST:

Campus ambassador 

ROLE OF A CAMPUS AMBASSADOR:

The role of a Campus Ambassador primarily entails: 

  • Promoting various events and posts at various social media platforms and in your college
  • To bring on board the maximum number of students to the organisation through your profile link
  • Share posters provided by All India Legal Forum in your campus notice board.
  • Meeting targets allocated by the mentor.
  • Circulating ads, posters and videos through E-mail, WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, etc. 
  • Reporting of progress on a daily basis to the allocated mentor

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:

  • Students who are currently enrolled in the 3-year and 5-year UG Law course and willing to work for six months.
  • Students who are active on social media.

NO. OF VACANCIES: 

Unlimited

TENURE:
Six months

PERKS:

  • A Certificate of appreciation will be given every month based on performance to the selected top performers.
  • Certificate of completion will be given upon successful completion of the tenure of six months. 
  • Special perks will be given (if possible)

APPLICATION PROCESS:

Interested candidates may mail their CVs at ailf12345campus@gmail.com latest by 30 November 2020. The subject of the e-mail should be “Application for Campus ambassador”.

We will revert your confirmation after 30 November 2020. 

About the Organization:

Jus Commune is an online forum that promotes and seeks to maintain various legal competitions. The contests’ platter shall consist of quizzes, article writing, judgment writing, online debates etc. We strive to stimulate your abilities, and encourage you to sharpen your skills. We would showcase the best compositions with pride on Jus Commune. We believe that it’s competition which ensures the survival of the fittest.

About the Competition:

Several reputed Law Colleges and Legal Forums in India invite people for expressing their views and opinions in the form of an Article or Research Paper for Journals, Conferences and Seminars for promoting exchange of ideas and finding a proper solution up on a particular aspect. And for enabling participation and publication, interested persons are expected to submit Abstracts – short write-ups explaining what the Author seeks to convey through their Full Paper is expected to be done meticulously, if an opportunity to suggest measures or highlight discrepancies before dignitaries of the fraternity is to be grabbed. 

Realizing the importance of this, we at Jus Commune invite Creative Abstracts, assuring publication opportunities for the Winners and promoting the importance of Abstract Writing in the country. 

Eligibility:

– Open to all law students from 3 year LLB, 5 year BA/BBA/BCOM LLB, PhD and LLM programs. 

– Law graduates as well as advocates

Topic:

Open theme related to Social issues or Law.

Prizes: 

  1. Top 3 Winners: Certificate of Merit + Free Publication of their research papers in the Journal for Law Students  and Researchers (JLSR) + Certificate of Publication.  
  1. Next 5 Winners shall be assured Certificate of Merit+ Free Publication of their research paper on Jus Commune under an esteemed category of highly recognized ones with their photographs and names.    
  1. Next 10 Winners shall be assured Certificate of Appreciation and their abstracts shall be published in a separate column with their names. 
  1. Certificate of Participation shall be assured for participants who register successfully and submit the Abstract within the deadline 

Guidelines for Contribution: 

  1. All Abstracts must be submitted in English Language only.
  2. The length of the Abstract must not exceed 700 words.
  3. Since it is an Abstract, Footnotes/Endnotes are not required. 
  4. Co-authorship is allowed up to one Co-author (Not more than 2 Authors per Abstract) 
  5. All submissions shall be made in Pdf or Word.doc format.
  6. Details of the author(s) shall be provided in the body of the email while submitting the Abstract or Paper for the Competition. 
  7. The plagiarism level must not exceed 20% for the abstract and the research paper.
  8. All the submissions shall be made to editor.juscommune@gmail.com 

NOTE

Only the top 5 abstract authors shall be asked to produce research papers with universal citations for the purpose of publication in JLSR and Jus Commune.

The length of the research paper shouldn’t exceed 2000 words. This would also include the abstract of 700 words, which implies that one would only have to write 1300 words if one’s abstract is selected in the top 5 category.

Deadlines:

Registration: 20th January 2021

Submissions: 30th January 2021

NOTE

The deadline of 30th January is only for Abstract submission.

After the selection of the top 15 abstracts, a reasonable amount of time will be provided to the top 5 authors for furnishing research papers.

Registration Fees: 

Payment for Single Author: 60 Rupees

Co authorship: (Team Payment) : 100 Rupees

Payment shall be made to Aditi Mishra via Paytm/Google pay: 9861723001

Mode of Registration: 

Participants are required to fill in the Google Form Link for Registering: 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1yzTK80MPWef4aZ59-Rd35nyV1cQql6bVItS1i2Mbk_A/prefill

The Screenshot of the Payment of the Registration shall be attached with the Form for successful registration for the Competition. 

Contact Us:

Email ID: communejus@gmail.com

Lavanya Rai: 6307317158

Aditi Mishra: 9861723001

Do Visit:

Website: http://thejuscommune.wordpress.com

Instagram: @jus.commune

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jus-commune-b7a6021a6

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/commune.jus.3

About The Competition

As Young Minds, our brain keeps generating different ideas and perspectives regarding everything latest happening around us. Sometimes, we even tend to share our viewpoint with people using different social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and others. But it unfortunately does not result into any fruitful outcome or solution because the kind of audience there, is either not interested in logical arguments or does not takes social media debates seriously or in place of constructive criticism they convert it into an ugly spat.

We, at Together We Can We Will, respect opinions of each and every individual having courage to keep out his or her wisdom of words with utmost dignity and respect leading to the betterment of our society.

Hence, we are announcing a never-before-organised event YOUR OPINION MATTERS! giving a stage to our fellow-countrymen to speak out their opinions without any fear or hesitation.

PATTERN of the Competition

The Competition will be held in Two Rounds.

1. Pen Down Perspective

2. Say it Out!

Round 1

PEN DOWN PERSPECTIVE (Ground Rules)

  1. A total of 10 burning topics will be released, out of which, each participant has to pick any 3 topics.
  2. In the first round, the participant has to prepare a 400 words write-up of all the 3 topics each (i.e. a total of 1200 words), giving his/her viewpoint on those topics either in AFFIRMATIVE OR NEGATIVE.
  3. Top 30 write-ups will be selected and be qualified for the next round. All the 3 topics will be judged as a single document and if one topic is rejected the entire document will be declared disqualified for the next round.
  4. Do remember that your perspective must not be two sided. Write in either Negative or Positive tone only.
  5. The viewpoints must contain some logic and must not be baseless Arguments.
  6. All the 3 topics must be written in a single word document only. Give separate headings to each topic.
  7. Try to give your views in form of pointers and not mundane looking paragraphs. Remember it is not a writing competition. We are just interested in your opinions, hence make it as interesting as possible.
  8. You are very much free to do constructive criticism but make sure you do not use offensive or abusive language at any point of time. Offensive use of words will straight-way lead to disqualification. Make sure you do not harm the dignity of our nation and its fundamentals.
  9. References- There are no limits to references. You can quote news from media, social media, newspapers and news channels live debates, etc in order to prove your point.
  10. Language- For the first round, ENGLISH Only.

Note:

We are aiming towards a heart to heart discussion. Hence, be open enough to keep your points without hesitation and be patient enough to listen to other person’s perspective

BASIS OF SELECTION AND QUALIFICATION FOR NEXT ROUND

  • The pointers must contain logic.
  • There must be a proper balance in application of law and emotional quotient.
  • Strong and impactful use of language
  • Authenticity of references
  • Knowledge of the subject/topic

Round 2

Say it Out! (Ground Rules)

  1. You will be given one best written topic from your document. 
  2. You will be given 3 minutes to speak 
  3. First 3 minutes for the speaker in Affirmation of that topic and then next 3 minutes for the speaker in Negation of that topic.
  4. Then 1 minute for rebuttal (30-30 second to each speaker)
  5. Then the next 1 minute of Audience Rebuttal (one question will be put up by the host and asked by each speaker. The speaker will be given extra points for good and effective tackling of the question.
  6. Language- English and Hindi both
  7. No use of offensive or Abusive language will be tolerated and it may also lead to immediate disqualification.
  8. As soon as you have finished your speech part, you have to sit back and listen to the other listeners of the same topic and prepare strong Audience- Rebuttals. The strongest audience Rebuttal will be recognized and awarded.
  9. Note there will be 10 speakers from each topic (5 in Against the motion and 5 in for the motion). But at one point of time only any 2 will be facing each other.
  10. Only 1 out of the 10 will be declared as the winner.

BASIS OF JUDGMENT IN THE SECOND ROUND

  1. Confidence in speech
  2. Validity of points put-up
  3. Clarity of Words
  4. Fluent use of language (Hindi or English

Registration Fee

Rs 50/-

Registration for first round can be done by clicking here 

Awards and Perks 

  1. Certificate of Participation to all (Softcopy)
  2. Certificate of Merit to all those who clears 1st round
  3. Certificate of Excellence to winners
  4. 50% off on all courses offered by KaTog
  5. Free publication in our organisation’s E- Journal
  6. Cash Prizes and many more

Event Date 

Round 1- Results will be declared on 20th December 2020
Round 2- Speaking Competition will be held on 27th December 2020
Meeting platform of second round: Zoom 
Contact Us: +91-7985754828, +91-9654650071

This case analysis is written by Nikhat Fatima Chaudhary currently pursuing Law from Rizvi Law College.

Case Number

Cr. A. No. 21.4 of 1969.

Equivalent Citations

1973 AIR 819, 1973 SCR (2) 728

Bench

DUA, I.D.

Decided On

27/10/1972

Relevant Act/Section

Section 361

Section 366

Brief Facts and Procedural History

Jai Narain, the co-accused in the case, had tried to become intimate with the prosecutrix, Santosh Rani girl of fourteen, and to seduce her to go and live with him. When her father forbade to visit his house, Jai Narain started sending messages to the prosecutrix through the respondent. On the day of the occurrence, the respondent Raja Ram, went to see the prosecutrix and asked her to visit his house, and later, on the same day, sent his daughter to fetch the prosecutrix. When she came, Raja Ram  informed her that she should come to his house at about midnight when she would be taken to Jai Narain. That night, when Santosh Rani came to his house, the respondent took her with him and handed her over to Jai Narain.On the question, whether Raja Ram was guilty under S.361, I.P.C., of the offence of kidnaping from lawful guardianship, the trial Court convicted him, but the High Court set aside the conviction. The High Court was of the opinion that, The girl left the house of her father at midnight of her free will. Raja Ram, appellant, did not go to her house to persuade her and to bring her from there.Once the act of going on the part of the girl is voluntary and conformable to her own wishes and the conduct of the :girl leaves no doubt that it is so, Raja Ram appellant could not be held to have either taken or seduced the girl”.

Issues Raised before the Court

  • Whether Raja Ram is guilty under Section 361 IPC?

Ratio of the Case

The Supreme Court held that the object of section 361 seems as much to protect the minor children from being seduced for improper purposes as to protect the rights and privileges of guardians having the lawful charge or custody of their minor wards. The words “takes or entices any minor out of the keeping of the lawful, guardian of such minor” in s. 361, are significant. The use of the word “keeping” in the context connotes the idea of charge, protection, maintenance and control, further the guardian’s charge and control-appears to be compatible with the independence of action and movement in the minor, the guardian’s protection and control of the minor being available, whenever necessity arises On plain reading of this section the consent of the minor who is taken or enticed is wholly immaterial : it is only the guardian’s consent which takes the case out of its purview. Nor is it necessary that the taking or enticing must be shown to have, been by means of force, or fraud. Persuasion by the accused person which creates willingness on the part of the minor to be taken out of the keeping of the lawful guardian would be sufficient to attract the section. Raja Ram’s action was the proximate cause of the prosecutrix going out of the keeping of her father and indeed but for Raja Ram’s persuasive offer to take her to Jai Narain the prosecutrix would not have gone out of the keeping of her father who was her lawful guardian, as she actually did. Raja Ram actively participated in the formation of the intention of the prosecutrix to leave her father’s house. The fact that the prosecutrix was easily persuaded to go with Raja Ram would not prevent him from being guilty of the offence of kidnapping her. Her consent or willingness to accompany Raja Ram would be immaterial and it would be equally so even if the proposal to go with Raja Ram had emanated from her. There is no doubt a distinction between taking and allowing a minor to accompany a person. In the present case the, acquittal by the High Court is clearly erroneous both on facts and in law and keeping in view the nature of the offence committed we consider that there is clearly failure of justice justifying interference by this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution. 

Decision of the Court

Appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the High Court acquitting Raja Ram, respondent, and the order of the Second Addi tional Sessions Judge was restored.

Latest Posts


Archives