26 February

Sticky

Reply by our President, Mr. Mathews Nedumpara to the letter of a Former Union Minister and currently a Member of Parliament on Judicial Reforms.

Sir, Thank you so much for your kind letter and the good wishes for my humble effort. Judicial reform is nearly impossible without the actual participation and initiative of the members of Parliament. The perception of the general public is that most of our political leaders are corrupt or incompetent. I certainly do not subscribe to that view. I have been campaigning that to demonize the political executive and political leaders is doing great disservice to the idea of democracy. The decision of the Parliament, as the great philosopher, Sir Thomas Smith, has said in the 16th century, is the decision...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Doctrine of locus poenintentae does not empower a court to alter a judgment pronounced in the open court except with notice to the parties and affording them an opportunity to be heard. Read the Review in Rambo Fashions case.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

Rambo Fashions Limited … Review Petitioner (Orig. Petitioner) Versus Board of Directors, State Bank of India and ors. … Respondents (Orig. Respondents) SYNOPSIS The Review Petitioner is constrained to seek a review of the judgment dated 9.9.2021 passed in the above Writ Petition, for the said judgment which was uploaded in the website of the Registry of the Bombay High Court rendered by the division bench headed by the Hon'ble Chief is one rendered void ab initio, still born, one which never existed in the eye of law.Because what has been authenticated and uploaded is different from the one which was...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

S.3 of the judges Protection Act which provides for absolute immunity to judges from civil and criminal action even when they willfully deny justice is unconstitutional, pleads Sabina Lakdawala. Read her Petition

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

S.3 of the judges Protection Act which provides for absolute immunity to judges from civil and criminal action even when they willfully deny justice is unconstitutional, pleads Sabina Lakdawala. Read her Petition Mathews J Nedumpara 26.02.2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE IN BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022. Sabina Lakdawala …Petitioners Versus Komal Singh Rajput & Ors. …Respondents I N D E X Sr. No. Particulars Page No. 1. Proforma I-III 2. Synopsis A-C 3. Memorandum of Petition 4. Vakalatnama 5. Memorandum of Registered Address 6. List of documents 7. EXHIBIT- “A”:- A true Copy of Marriage Certificate 8. EXHIBIT- “B” Copy of the order dated 28.7.2021 of the High Court of Bombay exploring...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Plea in the Bombay High Court by NLC seeking notification of the vacancies of the judges and an open and transparent selection of the most eligible and deserving.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2018 In the matter of Article 226 of the Constitution of India; AND In the matter of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India; AND In the matter of Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution of India. AND In the matter of appointment of Judges to the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay. 1. Rohini M. Amin, Advocate and General Secretary of National Lawyers’ Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms, adult, Indian inhabitant, having her address at 304, Hari Chambers, 3rd Floor, 54/68 SBS Marg, Near Old Custom House, Fort, Mumbai- 400 023. 2....

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Are not PILs ‘Ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing?’

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

To 1. Hon'ble Mr. Justice NV Ramana Chief Justice of India Also to, Hon'ble Mr. Manohar Lal Khattar Chief Minister of Haryana Sub: Demolition of the shanties of thousands of migrant laborers and urban poor, in the implementation of a judgement of the Supreme Court in purported PILs, rendered entirely behind their back. I have been on a campaign since 2010, when I first came to Bombay as a stranger, after being in the Bar for more than 25 years. It may appear strange to your Lordship, the campaign I started was for the "cry of the poor" to borrow an expression from Justice Krishna Iyer, to...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

‘Tribunalisation is trivialisation of Justice’ – abolish it.Review petition of Rambo Fashions Ltd would convince even doubting Thomas’s

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, MUMBAI Miscellaneous Application No. _______ of 2022 in Interlocutory Application no. 835 of 2021 in S.A. no. 249 of 2018 Rambo Fashions Limited & Ors. … Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Rambo Fashions Limited & Ors. … Appellant Versus State Bank of India & Ors. … Respondents GENERAL INDEX Sr. No. ParticularsPage No. PART – A AFACT SHEET BLIST OF DATES & EVENTS 1.Application for review 2.Affidavit in Support of Application PART- B 4.List of Documents 5.Exhibit “A” A Copy of the order 21.01.2022 6.Exhibit – “B” A copy of the letter dated 08.08.2011 by M/s. M.V Kini & Co 7.Exhibit – “C” A copy of the IA...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Mathews J Nedumpara’s letter to Ratan Tata requesting him not to squander the assets of the Tata Trusts whose beneficial owners are the millions of poor, homeless, jobless, hungry and sick.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

Shri Ratan Tata Chairman TATA Trusts/TATA Sons Ltd. Respected Sir, 1. The Campaign for Home, of which I am the President, has instituted a few proceedings against the TATA Trusts, TATA Sons Ltd. and in the said proceedings you are also arrayed as a Respondent. Despite me holding your gracious self in the highest of esteem, awe and respect, we were constrained to institute legal proceedings, particularly a civil suit in the City Civil Court, Mumbai, because we bona fide believe that the public, the poor, the starving, the homeless, the beneficial owners of the TATA Trusts are denied what is legitimately due to...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Letter from Mr. Mathews Nedumpara to CJ – Bombay High Court for Emergent need to constitute sufficient number of Benches to hear bail applications of undertrials

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

2nd February, 2019 National Lawyers’ Campaign FOR JUDICIAL TRANSPARENCY & REFORMS Registration No: MH/MUM/1701/2015/GBBSD 304, Hari Chambers, 3rd Floor, 54/68 SBS Marg,Near Old Custom House, Fort, Mumbai- 400 023 Tel: 022 22626634 / Mobile: +91 98205 35428 / +91 9769110823 E. Mail: nationallawyerscampaign@gmail.com Hon'ble Shri Justice N.H. Patil, Chief Justice, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, MUMBAI-400 032. MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIP: Sub: Emergent need to constitute sufficient number of Benches to hear bail applications of undertrials – regarding. I address this letter as the president of the National Lawyers’ Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms (NLC), an association of the first generation lawyers who are subjected to discriminatory...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Basic Structure theory is dead and what was found in the NJAC case is its ghost

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

Basic structure doctrine is attacked on the premise that it is too vague and hazy, and hence cannot be a ground for determining whether a constitutional amendment is valid or not. Concepts like secularism, republican form of government, independence of judiciary etc. are concepts which are capable of definite meaning and it is absolutely rational to say that the Parliament ought not have the power to abrogate these basic features of the Constitution. There can hardly be two opinions on this aspect. But what has missed the attention of the Court, the government and the lawyers concerned is that the...

26 February

0 Comments

Sticky

Where a statute provides for an appeal against an interim order, is it open to a litigant to choose at his sweet will, a variation at the hands of the court of first instance or to opt for an appeal? Does the doctrine of res judicata have any application?

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

(Excerts from an affidavit drafted by Sri. Nedumpara) 1. This Court by its order dated 21.12.2021 was pleased to protect me from dispossession, but subject to the condition that I pay an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs. Had this Court had the benefit of hearing my lawyer, I bonafide believe, that this Court would have protected me without conditions. I sought my counsel’s advice. He told me that I can seek correction of the order before this Court (single bench) itself, or prefer an appeal under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, which provides for an appeal even against...

Disclaimer: