Skip to main content

Corruption

 Corruption

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The answer is a little enigmatic. It is more of a source of worry for scientists than for the general public; even the answers are uninteresting. What should genuinely concern us is our "Constitution." Which came first, the population or the corruption? Is there anyone who can figure out what the genuine attitude is behind it? It's tough to rely on any of them, since if it's 'corruption,' it can't sustain without a population. If population comes first, it is clear that corruption will take root in our daily lives.

When we look back at our history, we can find a clear reflection of corruption, despite the fact that the population was small.

When we look at India as a whole, we notice that it has a population of more than 100 million people, and according to Prof. Malthus, if the population grows faster than the rate of rise in food, the country would face a major problem. Right now, India's situation is similar, since the population is increasing in a Geometric Progression Ratio, but food production is increasing in an Arithmetic Progression Ratio only. As a result, the problem is quite serious, and India must take action to address it. What do you anticipate from the Court—-how many decisions does each Court issue in a single day?

What do you anticipate from the Court—-how many decisions does each Court issue in a single day? The findings are so limited to numbers that you can count them on your fingers. Though we may state that the economy has stabilised as a result of globalisation, what about our justice system, which is gradually deteriorating?"

People take my interview, when they see my resume, they see me and give me a suspicious look; I don't understand why, they might be thinking what's the reason that I am doing such a training at such a young stage of my career that has lost its magnitude in the past few weeks; I don't understand why, they might be thinking what's the reason that I am doing such a training at such a young stage of my career that has lost its magnitude in the past few weeks.

They even know in their hearts that no one will go to the courts for any relief because they know how long it will take to get justice; it's a long line out there. So, what are the factual elements that are constantly putting our judiciary in its worst nightmares?


When we say that our justice system is derived from the British and that some parts have been adopted from America, why are we still lacking in our resources? Once we have accepted their culture to some extent, their work environments, and all those things that are normally not accepted in our day-to-day lives, why do we forget about the working environments of their Courts as well?

We should seek assistance and modernise ourselves, as well as our working procedures, in order to minimise delays in any legal actions.

"Corruption" is the most concerning element. Corruption exists at every level. Is it really necessary to throw ourselves at it rather than condemning it directly? Every individual believes that his or her task should be completed quickly; and why not? When individuals pay, they understand that their task will be completed on their schedule. However, they continue to bribe, not to speed up their job, but to make the other party pleased. Why is this required; it's tough to comprehend every Indian attitude.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree