Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Modi government moves to ease business rules, weed out archaic laws




TNN | Jun 25, 2014, 03.52 AM IST

NEW DELHI: With a view to revive investor sentiment, Union law ministry has written to the Law Commission asking it to suggest ways to ensure that business disputes are treated as such and not as criminal ones, as well as to examine whether companies can be given clearances on the basis of "self-certification". 

In a letter to the Law Commission a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a review of his ministry, law minister Ravishankar Prasad has highlighted what he termed the trend of commercial disputes being camouflaged as criminal disputes and being taken to magistrates with the risk of penal consequences coming in play. "While crimes ought to be prosecuted, we cannot allow a situation where business rivalries are sought to be settled by passing them off as crimes," said a source in the law ministry to explain the context of Prasad's letter to Justice (retd) A P Shah. 

The concern follows the arrest warrant a Ghaziabad court issued against the global chief of Samsung on the basis of a complaint filed by one of the vendors of the Korean giant.


Sources also said that Prasad asked the Law Commission to explore that the desirability of giving companies certain clearances on the basis of "self-certification" is not in the breach of the relevant norms. "This is to smoothen the process as the task of requiring all the relevant clearances can be cumbersome and time-consuming and keep the projects from getting off the ground," said a source, emphasizing that the companies will be liable for punishment if they are found to have misrepresented facts to secure clearances. 

 
Prasad has also asked Shah to prepare a list of archaic laws and suggest ways to weed them out. "As PM has emphasized, we are saddled with laws which we don't need. We have to get rid of them," said an official in the law ministry. 

The law minister also asked Justice Shah for a framework to encourage arbitration as dispute-resolution mechanism, and to make suggestions on how India can become an international hub of arbitration.

ஜெ. சொத்துகளை மதிப்பீடு செய்ததில் குளறுபடி: பெங்களூர் நீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜெயலலிதாவின் வழக்கறிஞர் 4-வது நாளாக இறுதிவாதம்


தி இந்து:புதன், ஜூன் 25, 2014

ஜெயலலிதாவின் சொத்துகளை மதிப்பீடு செய்ததில் தமிழக லஞ்ச ஒழிப்பு போலீஸாரும், மதிப்பீட்டுக் குழுவினரும் குளறுபடி செய் துள்ளனர் என ஜெயலலிதாவின் வழக்கறிஞர் பி.குமார் 4-வது நாளாக தனது இறுதிவாதத்தை எடுத்துரைத்தார்.

ஜெயலலிதா, சசிகலா, சுதாகரன், இளவரசி ஆகியோர் மீதான சொத் துக்குவிப்பு வழக்கின் விசாரணை செவ்வாய்க்கிழமை பெங்களூர் சிறப்பு நீதிமன்றத்தில் நீதிபதி ஜான் மைக்கேல் டி'குன்ஹா முன்னிலை யில் நடைபெற்றது.

தமிழக முதல்வர் ஜெயலலிதா வின் வழக்கறிஞர் பி.குமார் தனது இறுதிவாதத்தின்போது கூறியதா வது: தமிழக லஞ்ச ஒழிப்பு போலீ ஸார் 6.12.1996 அன்று ஜெயலலி தாவை கைது செய்தனர். அதற்கு அடுத்த நாளிலிருந்து ஜெயலலிதா வின் வீட்டிலும், நிறுவனங்களி லும் சோதனை நடத்தி, அசையும் மற்றும் அசையா சொத்துகளை மதிப்பீடு செய்தனர்.

இந்திய ஊழல் தடுப்பு சட்டத் தின்படி, குற்றம்சாட்டப்பட்டவர்கள் முன்னிலையில்தான் அவருக்கு சொந்தமான வீடு உள்ளிட்ட இடங் களில் சோதனை நடத்த வேண்டும். ஆனால் இந்த வழக்கில் அவ்வாறு நடைபெறவில்லை. மேலும் அவரின் கட்டிடங்களையும், வீடுகளில் உள்ள பொருட்களையும் மதிப்பிடுகை யில் தமிழக லஞ்ச ஒழிப்பு போலீ ஸார் எடுத்த வீடியோவை, ஜெய லலிதாவின் புகழுக்கு களங்கம் விளைவிக்கும் விதமாக திமுக ஆதரவு தொலைக்காட்சியில் சட்டத் திற்கு புறம்பாக ஒளிபரப்பினர்.

அதே போல இவ்வழக்கில் ஜெயலலிதாவிற்கு நெருக்கமான வர்களாக கூறப்படும் சசிகலா, சுதாகரன், இளவரசி ஆகியோருடன் எனது கட்சிக்காரருக்கு எவ்வித தொடர்பும் இல்லை.
லஞ்ச ஒழிப்பு சட்டம் 1 (1) (இ) மற்றும் 169-பிரிவு களின்படி உறவினர்களின் சொத்து களை சம்பந்தப்பட்டவரின் சொத் தாக கருதக் கூடாது என கூறப்பட்டி ருக்கிறது.

இங்கிலாந்து தலைமை நீதி மன்றம் 'ஒயிட் ஹவுஸ்' தொடர்பான வழக்கு ஒன்றில், வழங்கிய தீர்ப் பில் மகனுடைய சொத்து எவ்விதத் திலும் தந்தையின் சொத்தாக கருத முடியாது என உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது. அந்த வகையில் சம்பவம் நிகழ்ந்த போது சுதாகரன் ஜெயலலிதாவின் வளர்ப்பு மகனாக இருந்தாலும், அவருடைய சொத்துகள் எவ்விதத் திலும் ஜெயலலிதாவின் சொத்து மதிப்புடன் சேராது.

மதிப்பீட்டில் குளறுபடி

இவ்வழக்கில் ஜெயலலிதாவின் கட்டிடங்களை மதிப்பீடு செய்வதற் காக அப்போதைய திமுக அரசு ஜெயபால் என்ற இன்ஜினீயர் தலை மையில் 8 பேர் கொண்ட குழுவை அமைத்தது. மதிப்பீட்டு குழுவில் இருந்த 8 பேரும் தமிழக அரசின் ஊழியர்களாக இருந்ததால், அரசுக்கு ஆதரவாக செயல்பட்டுள் ளனர். அவர்கள் சட்டவிதிமுறை களைப் பின்பற்றாமல் ஜெயலலி தாவின் சொத்துகளை மதிப்பிட் டுள்ளனர்.

ஜெயபால் தலைமையிலான மதிப்பீட்டுக் குழு, ஜெயலலிதா விற்கு சொந்தமான கட்டிடங்கள் குறித்து 3 அறிக்கைகளை தாக்கல் செய்திருக்கிறது.

அதில் ஜெயலலிதாவின் கட்டிடங்களின் மதிப்பு ரூ.16 கோடி எனக் கூறப்பட்டுள்ளது. 1968-ல் கட்டப்பட்ட கட்டிடங்களை எல்லாம் 1996-ம் ஆண்டு மதிப்பில் கணக்கீடு செய்து மதிப்பிட்டதன் மூலம் சொத்துமதிப்பை அதிகமாக காட்டியுள்ளனர்.

மதிப்பீட்டுக் குழுவினர் தாக்கல் செய்துள்ள 3 அறிக்கைகளிலும் 8 பேரும் வெவ்வேறு தினங்களில் கையெழுத்திட்டுள்ளனர். இதன் மூலம் ஜெயலலிதாவின் கட்டிடங் களை முறையாக மதிப்பீடு செய்யா மல் குளறுபடி செய்துள்ளனர் என்பது தெளிவாக தெரிகிறது'' என்றார்.

மேலும் 5 நிறுவனங்களின் மனுக்கள் தள்ளுபடி

சொத்துக்குவிப்பு வழக்கில் இருந்து தங்களை விடுவிக்குமாறு கடந்த வாரம் ஜெ பார்ம் ஹவுஸ், ஜெ ரியல் எஸ்டேட், க்ரீன் பார்ம் ஹவுஸ், ஜெ & சசி ஹவுஸிங் டெவலப்மெண்ட், ஆஞ்சநேயா பிரிண்டர்ஸ் ஆகிய நிறுவனங்கள் மனு தாக்கல் செய்திருந்தன.

இந்த மனுவை பெங்களூர் சிறப்பு நீதிமன்றத்தில் நீதிபதி ஜான் மைக்கேல் டி'குன்ஹா செவ்வாய்க்கிழமை விசாரித்தார். அப்போது, தனியார் நிறுவனங்கள் தாக்கல் செய்துள்ள மனுக்களுக்கு அரசு உதவி வழக்கறிஞர் முருகேஷ் எஸ்.மரடி கடும் எதிர்ப்புத் தெரிவித்தார்.
தொடர்ந்து பேசிய நீதிபதி டி'குன்ஹா, ''வழக்கில் இணைக்கப்பட்டுள்ள ஜெ ரியல் எஸ்டேட், ஆஞ்சநேயா பிரிண்டர்ஸ் உள்ளிட்ட 5 தனியார் நிறுவனங்களின் மனுக்கள் தள்ளுபடி செய்யப்படுகின்றன. 

வழக்கு இறுதிக்கட்டத்தை எட்டியிருக்கும் நிலையில், விசாரணையை தாமதிக்கும் நோக்கில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்யப்பட்டுள்ளது. 

இது உள்நோக்கம் கொண்ட செயலாகும்” என்றார். 

கடந்த வாரம் லெக்ஸ் பிராப்பர்ட்டீஸ் உள்ளிட்ட 5 தனியார் நிறுவனங்களின் மனுக்களும் தள்ளுபடி செய்யப்பட்டது.

Subramanium seeks withdrawal of candidature as SC judge

Gopal Subramanium
PTI Newdelhi June 25, 2014 14:26 IST

Feeling “let down” by the government and the Supreme Court over rejection of his name, senior advocate Gopal Subramanium on Wednesday asked the Chief Justice of India to withdraw the recommendation of his candidature as judge of the apex court.

He has written a letter to the Supreme Court collegium headed by Chief Justice R.M. Lodha requesting him to “withdraw” the recommendation for his elevation as judge of the apex court.
He is also said to be of the view that the candidature of a judge of the Supreme Court should be decided in some kind of sacredness and should not be bashed about.

The name of Mr. Subramanium, who served as the Solicitor-General during the UPA regime, was recommended by the collegium for elevation to the apex court bench along with some other names.

But the government rejected his name and returned the file over his name while accepting the recommendation related to others, including another lawyer Rohinton Nariman.

“In the circumstances, he (Subramanium) does not feel that his name should be reconsidered for elevation to the judge of the Supreme Court. So he has written a letter to CJI to withdraw his candidature as the judge of the Supreme Court,” his office said.

Though the government did not say anything officially on the rejection, there were reports that its decision was based on a CBI report that had questioned Subramanium’s role in arranging a meeting with the lawyer of the 2G accused even when he was the lawyer for CBI.

Upset over the media reports, Mr. Subramanium maintained that his conduct was clear and he had written to the Law Minister Kapil Sibal in the previous government about the extent of criminality in the 2G case that was hidden by the government when he was its counsel.


Objections from judges force rethink on judicial accountability Bill

Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad at his office in New Delhi on Tuesday.— Photo Rajeev Bhatt 

The Hindu 25 June 2014

Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on Tuesday said the government was having a rethink on the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill in view of objections from judges.
The Bill, pending in Parliament, seeks to lay down enforceable standards of conduct for judges. It requires judges to declare details of theirs and their family members’ assets and liabilities and it creates mechanism to allow any person to complain against judges on grounds of ‘misbehaviour or incapacity.’

“We want to have broad discussion with senior lawyers, former Chief Justices and judges and other stake holders before taking a view on it,” Mr. Prasad told The Hindu . On a National Judicial Commission providing for appointment and transfer of judges in the higher judiciary, Mr. Prasad said “even on this aspect we will have wider consultations.”

The Law Minister refused to be drawn into the controversy relating to putting on hold the elevation of senior advocate Gopal Subramanium as a judge of the Supreme Court, saying “no comments.” Asked what would be the government’s stand if the collegium headed by Chief Justice of India R.M. Lodha were to reiterate Mr. Subramanium’s recommendation, he said: “We will cross the bridge when it comes.”

When his attention was drawn to a Ghaziabad court’s action in summoning Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Kun-Hee to appear in a cheating case and asked whether such instances would drive away investors, Mr. Prasad said the government had asked the Law Commission to examine whether cases relating to contractual disputes, which were purely civil in nature, could be turned into a criminal case. He said filing of such criminal cases was also affecting investment climate. He wanted the Commission to make the Arbitration Act more effective to make India a hub for international arbitration.

Mr. Prasad outlined the initiatives taken by his Ministry in the last 22 days to streamline the judicial system which was clogged by huge pendency of cases and vacancies of judges, particularly in the subordinate judiciary.

Mr. Prasad said he had written to Chief Justices of various High Courts and to the State governments to expedite the process of filling up vacancies in the subordinate judiciary keeping in view the vacancies that might arise in three years ahead. He had asked the Chief Justices and the States to fast-track trial relating to women, children and elderly people.
He said another area of concern was pendency of over 22-lakh cheque bouncing cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and 18-20 lakh cases before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals. He had asked the Chief Justices of High Courts to suggest measures for speedy disposal of these cases.

On amendment to Lokpal selection rules, the Minister said: “Certain things are needed to be done to make the law meaningful.” On the absence of Leader of the Opposition to participate in the Lokpal selection process, he said the issue of LoP would be decided by the Lok Sabha Speaker.

Monday, June 23, 2014

Top 50 loan defaulters to face action


Sidhartha, TNN | Jun 23, 2014, 05.02AM IST

NEW DELHI: The government has asked banks to launch an offensive against the country's top 50 loan defaulters to change the perception that state-run lenders tend to be soft towards large borrowers while giving little leeway to retail borrowers and SMEs. 

Top bankers told TOI that the issue was discussed by financial services secretary G S Sandhu last week with bank chiefs from several leading public sector players, including State Bank of India, Punjab National Bank and IDBI Bank. 

"There is a perception, which may or may not be correct, that we don't act decisively against corporate borrowers and the government is keen to dispel that notion,"said a bank chief, who attended the meeting in the finance ministry.


Sources said the lenders have been asked to initiate all possible action against the top 50 defaulters to send a message that the companies cannot get away without clearing their dues to banks. On their part, bankers are learnt to have told the government that it is not often easy to recover the dues and they have to undergo a long process of litigation. "Every notice is challenged in courts and it is very tough. It is not as if we don't want to recover the dues," said a banker, adding that often they come under pressure from the finance ministry to restructure loans before they turn no-performing assets. 

Apart from the change of guard at the Centre, the government is keen that banks recover their dues from defaulters as they are saddled with a pile of bad debt, putting their credit worthiness at risk. Global rating agencies have flagged rising level of sticky assets as one of the major concerns for the Indian economy. 

In recent years, several prominent corporate groups have found it difficult to repay their loans, including the flamboyant Vijay Mallya, whose now-grounded Kingfisher Airlines owes over Rs 7,000 crore, mostly to public sector banks. His lavish lifestyle, despite his company's financial woes, has raised many eyebrows. Kolkata-based United Bank of India has already served a notice to treat Mallya and others linked to the airline as "wilful defaulters" which will choke loan flow to all group companies. 

The other prominent defaulters in recent years include Winsome Diamond, Zoom Developers and S Kumars Nationwide. 

The All India Bank Employees Union released a list of 406 loan defaulters, who together owed over Rs 70,000 crore and are facing legal action. Banks are grappling with non-performing assets of over Rs 2 lakh crore, while loans to several large projects have been restructured, which prevented them from turning bad debt. 

In recent weeks, the government has begun talks for initiating a series of measures to reduce the pile of debt, including a new law that will link the jail term to the size of the default, apart from enabling lenders to initiate criminal action. 

Similarly, the debt recovery tribunal set up is being reworked and discussions on a new asset management company have begun

Agreeing to illegal gratification accept bribes also an offence: Kerala HC





TNN | Jun 23, 2014, 11.17 AM IST

KOCHI: A public servant agreeing to accept bribe can be held guilty, the Kerala high court has ruled, adding that it was not necessary to prove the person had accepted illegal gratification.

Justice A Hariprasad passed the ruling while considering an appeal by former sub-registrar of Peermade, B A Safia Beevi. She had moved the court challenging her conviction in a corruption case, which alleged she had accepted bribe for registering land-sale documents.

Referring to Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the court held that mere demand or solicitation of gratification by a public servant would not constitute an offence. The judge said the demand must have a bearing on doing any official act.

"In order to bring home the guilt of a public servant, it is not necessary to prove he has actually accepted or obtained illegal gratification," the court said.

The Kerala high court ruled, "It is enough if it is shown that he had agreed to accept illegal gratification," adding that the words "obtains or attempts to obtain" included threat or extortion.

The court further said that the payment need not necessarily made to the public servant. It could be considered an offence if it was made to a person designated by the accused. Based on Supreme Court decisions, the court also warned that prosecution was bound to prove such cases beyond doubt that the accused had agreed to accept bribe. The judge also said that independent corroboration would be required in such graft cases. "In one case, the apex court held that in "trap" cases, the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt if the money was "planted" in his absence or without his knowledge.

The court acquitted Beevi as prosecution failed in proving that the money, recovered from the sub-registrar's table, where the complainant had placed it, was more than the mandatory registration fee.