• If you want confidential legal advice kindly email to adv_joysarkar@live.in.

Friday, 17 September 2021

Laws & news 17.09.2021

 1. In R R V P N Ltd. and anr. Vs. Anil Kanwariya, 2021, Supreme Court of India observed that the credibility and/or trustworthiness of such an employee who at the initial stage of the employment, i.e., while submitting the declaration/verification and/or applying for a post made false declaration and/or not disclosing and/or suppressing material fact of having involved in a criminal case. If the correct facts would have been disclosed, the employer might not have appointed him. Then the question is of TRUST. Therefore, in such a situation, where the employer feels that an employee who at the initial stage itself has made a false statement and/or not disclosed the material facts and/or suppressed the material facts and therefore he cannot be continued in service because such an employee cannot be relied upon even in future, the employer cannot be forced to continue such an employee. The choice/option whether to continue or not to continue such an employee always must be given to the employer. At the cost of repetition, it is observed and as observed hereinabove in catena of decision such an employee cannot claim the appointment and/or continue to be in service as a matter of right.


2. As per Halsbury’s Laws of England, the discretion to award costs must be exercised judicially and in accordance with reason and justice. The following principles have been set out therein:

In deciding what order (if any) to make about costs, the court must have regard to all the circumstances, including:

(i) The conduct of all the parties;

(ii) Whether a party has succeeded on part of his case, even if he has not been wholly successful; and

(iii) Any payment into court or admissible offer to settle made by a party which is drawn to the court’s attention.


The conduct of the parties includes:

a. Conduct before, as well as during, the proceedings and in particular the extent to which the parties followed any relevant

pre-action protocol;

b. Whether it was reasonable for a party to raise, pursue or contest a particular allegation or issue;

c. The manner in which a party has pursued or defended his case or a particular allegation or issue; and

d. Whether a claimant who has succeeded in his claim, in whole or in part, exaggerated his claim.


1. The Indian Government imposes an antidumping duty on certain types of Aluminium Foil inter alia, originating in, or exported from China PR, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia and imported into India, produced by inter alia Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co., Ltd., Shanghai Sunho Aluminum Foil Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Five Star Aluminium Co., Ltd., M/s Jiangsu Fengyuan Aluminium Mstar Technology Co., Ltd., M/s Kunshan Aluminium Co.,Ltd., Thai Ding Li New Materials Co., Ltd., Dingheng New Materials Co., Ltd., M/s Loften (Thailand) Co., Ltd., M/s Varopakorn
Public Company Limited.
The reason for such being that such goods have been exported to India from the subject countries below normal values and domestic industry has suffered material injury on account of imports of subject goods from such countries and material injury has been caused by the dumped imports of such goods from the subject countries,The anti-dumping duty imposed shall be effective for a period of five years from 16th September 2021 unless revoked, superseded or amended earlier and shall be payable in Indian currency.

2. Amit Yadav, Director General of Foreign Trade & Ex-officio Additional Secretary, notified that the Directorate General of Foreign Trade hereby relaxes certain condition by inviting applications for grant of import authorization only for the
current financial year 2021-22 and last date is 31.10.2021 for the applications for such allocation of Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) under India - Mauritius 'Comprehensive Economic Cooperation and Partnership Agreement' for the year 2021-22. 

3. A new chapter is added to the Adoption Regulations, 2017, by the Adoption (Amendment) Regulations, 2021. This chapter is relating to PROCEDURE FOR CHILDREN ADOPTED UNDER THE HINDU ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE ACT, 1956, BY PARENTS WHO DESIRE TO RELOCATE CHILD ABROAD.

No comments:

A consumer litigation experience

 In one of the consumer complaint case after the District Consumer forum passed final order against the complainant the impugned order was a...