The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. From which date the Citizenship (Amendment) Act has come into force?
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. Migrants from which of the following country is not included in Citizenship Act?
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App |
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act is for religious minority groups persecuted in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh does not include_______.
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. New Citizenship Act amended which of the following act?
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. The assurances of Centre government that special measures will be taken under which clause of Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns?
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. The Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019 was approved by The Lok Sabha on
The Centre on Friday announced that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act will come into force from January 10. In a gazette notification, the Union home ministry said the act under which non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will be given Indian citizenship, will come into force from January 10.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 1 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (47 of 2019), the Central government hereby appoints the 10th day of January, 2020, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act shall come into force," the government notification said. It amended the Citizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December 2014.The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed by Parliament on Wednesday December 11, 2019, with the Rajya Sabha voting 125-99 in favour of the Bill.
CAA won't apply to areas under the sixth schedule of the Constitution – which deals with autonomous tribal-dominated regions in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The bill will also not apply to states that have the inner-line permit regime (Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram). The passage came amidst largescale protests in Assam, where the military had to be called in to control protesting crowds, despite assurances from the Centre that special measures will be taken under clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord to address Assamese concerns.
The Lok Sabha had approved the Bill by a significant majority on December 2, 2019. The legislation applies to those who were “forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the ground of religion”. It aims to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The cut-off date for citizenship was December 31, 2014 which means the applicant should have entered India on or before that date. Indian citizenship, under previous law, was given either to those born in India or if they have resided in the country for a minimum of 11 years.
Q. What was the time to be resided in India for eligibility of citizenship in citizenship Act of 1955?
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. What is the name of provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits?
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the______ from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. The ICICI bank has approached to which High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO?
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. Who violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics?
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019, to challenge "termination" of her employment by
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. Who argued that Kochhar's termination from her post?
The ICICI bank has approached the Bombay High Court seeking effect to "termination of appointment" of Chanda Kochhar as its Managing Director and CEO, and also sought recovery of various amounts from her.
In a monetary suit filed on 10 January, the bank sought dismissal of Kochhar's petition and stated that the issue can be decided in a commercial suit.
"ICICI has filed a suit seeking recovery of amounts towards the claw back of bonuses given to the petitioner (Kochhar) from April 2006 to March 2018 pursuant to the termination of the petitioner's services," the bank said in its affidavit.
A claw back is a provision in which incentive-based pay, like a bonus, is taken back from an employee by an employer following misconduct or declining profits.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a petition filed by Kochhar challenging her sacking, months after she voluntarily left the second largest private sector lender.
"On December 8, 2016, Kochhar executed a claw back agreement with the bank pursuant to which ICICI is entitled to a return of the previously paid variable pay or deferred variable pay from the petitioner in the event of a determination of a gross negligence or an integrity breach by Kochhar.
"The petitioner's conduct has caused substantial embarrassment to the bank and all the stakeholders, and has led to irreparable reputational loss to the bank," it stated.
The bank further stated that Kochhar flagrantly violated the ICICI Group Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.
"The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain illegal benefits," it stated.
The affidavit further said that Kochhar's petition challenging her sacking by the bank claiming violation of RBI rules is an "malafide attempt" to secure valuable stock options of the bank.
A division bench of Justices R.V. More and S.P. Tavade on Monday directed Kochhar's advocate Sujoy Kantawalla to go through the affidavit. It posted the matter for further hearing on 20 January.
Kochhar moved the HC on 30 November 2019 challenging "termination" of her employment by ICICI Bank, which also denied her remuneration for her alleged role in granting "out of turn loans worth ?3250 crore to Videocon Group which benefitted her husband Deepak Kochhar".
Kantawalla argued that Kochhar's termination from her post came months after the bank approved her voluntary resignation on 5 October 2018 and therefore the bank's action is "illegal, untenable, and unsustainable in law".
Q. The ICICI bank stated that "The petitioner (Kochhar) deliberately committed violation with a malafide intent to obtain________,"
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) is a tribunal which was formed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 43 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The tribunal is entrusted with the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, RERA and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority from 7th January 2020. As of 2020, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is presided over by a chairperson, Hon'ble Justice Shri. B. Sreenivase Gowda, a judicial member, Shri. Dinesh K. P., and administrative member, Shri. Somashekhar P. S.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA. All appeals arising under The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including proceedings relating to compensation, project registration/s and penalties under the Act shall be disposed of by the KA-REAT.
The bench is chaired by a chairperson who is a retired / presiding High Court Judge, a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least fifteen years or has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held the post of Additional Secretary of that service or any equivalent post, or has been an advocate for at least twenty years with experience in dealing with real estate matters and a technical member who he is a person wellversed in the field of urban development, housing, real estate development, infrastructure, economics, planning, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, management, public affairs or administration and possesses experience of at least twenty years in the field or who has held the post in the Central Government or a State Government equivalent to the post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India or an equivalent post in the Central Government or an equivalent post in the State Government.
Under Section 58 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him. Such an appeal can be filed on any one or more grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
As per Section 57 of the RERA Act and Rule 26 of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court. Notwithstanding the said powers of the tribunal, the appellate tribunal may transmit any order made by it to a civil court having local Jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by the court.
Q. Under which section of the Real state Act,2016 The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) was formed?
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) is a tribunal which was formed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 43 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The tribunal is entrusted with the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, RERA and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority from 7th January 2020. As of 2020, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is presided over by a chairperson, Hon'ble Justice Shri. B. Sreenivase Gowda, a judicial member, Shri. Dinesh K. P., and administrative member, Shri. Somashekhar P. S.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA. All appeals arising under The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including proceedings relating to compensation, project registration/s and penalties under the Act shall be disposed of by the KA-REAT.
The bench is chaired by a chairperson who is a retired / presiding High Court Judge, a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least fifteen years or has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held the post of Additional Secretary of that service or any equivalent post, or has been an advocate for at least twenty years with experience in dealing with real estate matters and a technical member who he is a person wellversed in the field of urban development, housing, real estate development, infrastructure, economics, planning, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, management, public affairs or administration and possesses experience of at least twenty years in the field or who has held the post in the Central Government or a State Government equivalent to the post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India or an equivalent post in the Central Government or an equivalent post in the State Government.
Under Section 58 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him. Such an appeal can be filed on any one or more grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
As per Section 57 of the RERA Act and Rule 26 of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court. Notwithstanding the said powers of the tribunal, the appellate tribunal may transmit any order made by it to a civil court having local Jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by the court.
Q. The tribunal body which adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA can be termed as
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) is a tribunal which was formed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 43 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The tribunal is entrusted with the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, RERA and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority from 7th January 2020. As of 2020, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is presided over by a chairperson, Hon'ble Justice Shri. B. Sreenivase Gowda, a judicial member, Shri. Dinesh K. P., and administrative member, Shri. Somashekhar P. S.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA. All appeals arising under The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including proceedings relating to compensation, project registration/s and penalties under the Act shall be disposed of by the KA-REAT.
The bench is chaired by a chairperson who is a retired / presiding High Court Judge, a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least fifteen years or has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held the post of Additional Secretary of that service or any equivalent post, or has been an advocate for at least twenty years with experience in dealing with real estate matters and a technical member who he is a person wellversed in the field of urban development, housing, real estate development, infrastructure, economics, planning, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, management, public affairs or administration and possesses experience of at least twenty years in the field or who has held the post in the Central Government or a State Government equivalent to the post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India or an equivalent post in the Central Government or an equivalent post in the State Government.
Under Section 58 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him. Such an appeal can be filed on any one or more grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
As per Section 57 of the RERA Act and Rule 26 of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court. Notwithstanding the said powers of the tribunal, the appellate tribunal may transmit any order made by it to a civil court having local Jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by the court.
Q. A bench of KA-REAT can be chaired by a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least __________.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) is a tribunal which was formed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 43 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The tribunal is entrusted with the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, RERA and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority from 7th January 2020. As of 2020, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is presided over by a chairperson, Hon'ble Justice Shri. B. Sreenivase Gowda, a judicial member, Shri. Dinesh K. P., and administrative member, Shri. Somashekhar P. S.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA. All appeals arising under The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including proceedings relating to compensation, project registration/s and penalties under the Act shall be disposed of by the KA-REAT.
The bench is chaired by a chairperson who is a retired / presiding High Court Judge, a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least fifteen years or has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held the post of Additional Secretary of that service or any equivalent post, or has been an advocate for at least twenty years with experience in dealing with real estate matters and a technical member who he is a person wellversed in the field of urban development, housing, real estate development, infrastructure, economics, planning, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, management, public affairs or administration and possesses experience of at least twenty years in the field or who has held the post in the Central Government or a State Government equivalent to the post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India or an equivalent post in the Central Government or an equivalent post in the State Government.
Under Section 58 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him. Such an appeal can be filed on any one or more grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
As per Section 57 of the RERA Act and Rule 26 of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court. Notwithstanding the said powers of the tribunal, the appellate tribunal may transmit any order made by it to a civil court having local Jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by the court.
Q. Under which section of The Real Estate Act, 2016 the order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him?
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (KA-REAT) is a tribunal which was formed by the Government of Karnataka under Section 43 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The tribunal is entrusted with the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, RERA and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority from 7th January 2020. As of 2020, the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is presided over by a chairperson, Hon'ble Justice Shri. B. Sreenivase Gowda, a judicial member, Shri. Dinesh K. P., and administrative member, Shri. Somashekhar P. S.
The Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that adjudicates issues arising between Developers and Homebuyers or Developers / Allottees and RERA. All appeals arising under The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including proceedings relating to compensation, project registration/s and penalties under the Act shall be disposed of by the KA-REAT.
The bench is chaired by a chairperson who is a retired / presiding High Court Judge, a judicial member who has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least fifteen years or has been a member of the Indian Legal Service and has held the post of Additional Secretary of that service or any equivalent post, or has been an advocate for at least twenty years with experience in dealing with real estate matters and a technical member who he is a person wellversed in the field of urban development, housing, real estate development, infrastructure, economics, planning, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, management, public affairs or administration and possesses experience of at least twenty years in the field or who has held the post in the Central Government or a State Government equivalent to the post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India or an equivalent post in the Central Government or an equivalent post in the State Government.
Under Section 58 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the KA-REAT is entitled to prefer an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka within a period of sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of KA-REAT to him. Such an appeal can be filed on any one or more grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
As per Section 57 of the RERA Act and Rule 26 of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court. Notwithstanding the said powers of the tribunal, the appellate tribunal may transmit any order made by it to a civil court having local Jurisdiction and such civil court shall execute the order as if it were a decree made by the court.
Q. By using which section and rule of the Karnataka Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, every judgement, order made by the appellate tribunal shall be executed by the tribunal as a decree of civil court?
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. A written contract created by two people before they are married is a
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. Postnuptial agreement is
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. Why did Courts scrutinize prenups with a suspicious eye?
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. If you live in a community property state, then what is the general rule about the Prenups?
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. In prenuptial agreement, what will not be divided after the marriage?
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. If you want to ensure that you don't end up paying spousal support then you need a
A prenuptial agreement ("prenup" for short) is a written contract created by two people before they are married. A prenup typically lists all of the property each person owns (as well as any debts) and specifies what each person's property rights will be after the marriage.
In some states, a prenuptial agreement is known as an "antenuptial agreement," or in more modern terms, a "premarital agreement." Sometimes the word "contract" is substituted for "agreement," as in "prenuptial contract." An agreement made during marriage, rather than before, is known as a "postnuptial," "post marital," or "marital" agreement.
As prenuptial agreements become more common, the law is becoming friendlier toward them. Traditionally, courts scrutinized prenups with a suspicious eye, because they almost always involved a waiver of legal and financial benefits by a less wealthy spouse and they were thought to encourage breakups.
As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures are increasingly willing to uphold premarital agreements. Today, every state permits them, although a prenup that is judged unfair or otherwise fails to meet state requirements will still be set aside.
However, because courts still look carefully at prenups, it is important that you negotiate and write up your agreement in a way that is clear, understandable, and legally sound. If you draft your own agreement, which we recommend, you'll want to have separate lawyers review it and at least briefly advise you about it -- otherwise a court is much more likely to question its validity.
Whether you need a prenup depends on where you live and what you want to accomplish with the contract. For example, if you live in a community property state, the general rule is that all assets acquired during your marriage will be divided 50/50 between you and your spouse if you divorce. And typically, separate property, including gifts, inheritances, and any property you owned before the marriage will not be divided in the divorce, and you will keep what you own individually.
If you live in a community property state and you're comfortable relying on these general rules, you may not need to go through the unromantic and sometimes stressful process of drafting a prenuptial agreement.
However, if you have specific ideas of how things should be divided or if you have separate property you want to make sure remains exclusively yours after a divorce, you may want to consider a prenup. Additionally, if you're certain that neither of you want to pay alimony in the event of a breakup, you may need a prenup to ensure you don't end up paying spousal support.
Q. As divorce and remarriage have become more prevalent, and with more equality between the sexes, courts and legislatures
Intellectual property rights (IPR) are basically negative rights, which allow the right-holder to (i) utilize, (ii) dispose of his rights and (iii) initiate legal action against those who infringe them. Anybody who misappropriates the property is faced with civil and/ or criminal consequences. While the traditional remedies include injunction, cost, damages, etc., what has assumed more popularity in these days is the non-traditional forms of remedies like, Anton Piller order, interlocutory injunction, etc. Anton Piller order is a very potent weapon in the plaintiff’s arsenal. Often dubbed as the ‘nuclear weapon’, it has the power even to destroy the defendant’s reputation and business. This potential of its being abused makes the order a force to reckon with. Generally, while granting an Anton Piller order, the Court has to balance between two conflicting interests- combating infringements of IPR and safeguarding the defendant’s right to privacy and privilege against self-incrimination. In this paper, various aspects of Anton Piller order, like jurisdictional aspect, requirements, safeguards against abuse, etc., through English cases are analyzed. In the end, scope of the application of Anton Piller order in Indian legal system through discussion of cases and various Acts is examined.
Anton Piller Order in UK -The Anton Piller order is a form of discovery preservation granted on ex parte application. It can comprise of an injunction to restrain infringement, permission to enter defendant's premises to inspect documents and remove originals or copies of the originals, permission to remove allegedly infringing goods, and an injunction to restrain defendant from disclosing contents of the injunction to third parties for a specified period. The purpose of the order was explained in Yousuf v Salama, where Lord Denning MR observed that the order intends to prevent the danger of destruction of evidence.
Q. The Intellectual Property India is administered by the Office of the:
Intellectual property rights (IPR) are basically negative rights, which allow the right-holder to (i) utilize, (ii) dispose of his rights and (iii) initiate legal action against those who infringe them. Anybody who misappropriates the property is faced with civil and/ or criminal consequences. While the traditional remedies include injunction, cost, damages, etc., what has assumed more popularity in these days is the non-traditional forms of remedies like, Anton Piller order, interlocutory injunction, etc. Anton Piller order is a very potent weapon in the plaintiff’s arsenal. Often dubbed as the ‘nuclear weapon’, it has the power even to destroy the defendant’s reputation and business. This potential of its being abused makes the order a force to reckon with. Generally, while granting an Anton Piller order, the Court has to balance between two conflicting interests- combating infringements of IPR and safeguarding the defendant’s right to privacy and privilege against self-incrimination. In this paper, various aspects of Anton Piller order, like jurisdictional aspect, requirements, safeguards against abuse, etc., through English cases are analyzed. In the end, scope of the application of Anton Piller order in Indian legal system through discussion of cases and various Acts is examined.
Anton Piller Order in UK -The Anton Piller order is a form of discovery preservation granted on ex parte application. It can comprise of an injunction to restrain infringement, permission to enter defendant's premises to inspect documents and remove originals or copies of the originals, permission to remove allegedly infringing goods, and an injunction to restrain defendant from disclosing contents of the injunction to third parties for a specified period. The purpose of the order was explained in Yousuf v Salama, where Lord Denning MR observed that the order intends to prevent the danger of destruction of evidence.
Q. What protects the intellectual property created by artists?
Intellectual property rights (IPR) are basically negative rights, which allow the right-holder to (i) utilize, (ii) dispose of his rights and (iii) initiate legal action against those who infringe them. Anybody who misappropriates the property is faced with civil and/ or criminal consequences. While the traditional remedies include injunction, cost, damages, etc., what has assumed more popularity in these days is the non-traditional forms of remedies like, Anton Piller order, interlocutory injunction, etc. Anton Piller order is a very potent weapon in the plaintiff’s arsenal. Often dubbed as the ‘nuclear weapon’, it has the power even to destroy the defendant’s reputation and business. This potential of its being abused makes the order a force to reckon with. Generally, while granting an Anton Piller order, the Court has to balance between two conflicting interests- combating infringements of IPR and safeguarding the defendant’s right to privacy and privilege against self-incrimination. In this paper, various aspects of Anton Piller order, like jurisdictional aspect, requirements, safeguards against abuse, etc., through English cases are analyzed. In the end, scope of the application of Anton Piller order in Indian legal system through discussion of cases and various Acts is examined.
Anton Piller Order in UK -The Anton Piller order is a form of discovery preservation granted on ex parte application. It can comprise of an injunction to restrain infringement, permission to enter defendant's premises to inspect documents and remove originals or copies of the originals, permission to remove allegedly infringing goods, and an injunction to restrain defendant from disclosing contents of the injunction to third parties for a specified period. The purpose of the order was explained in Yousuf v Salama, where Lord Denning MR observed that the order intends to prevent the danger of destruction of evidence.
Q. Which of the following is a form of discovery preservation granted on ex parte application.
Intellectual property rights (IPR) are basically negative rights, which allow the right-holder to (i) utilize, (ii) dispose of his rights and (iii) initiate legal action against those who infringe them. Anybody who misappropriates the property is faced with civil and/ or criminal consequences. While the traditional remedies include injunction, cost, damages, etc., what has assumed more popularity in these days is the non-traditional forms of remedies like, Anton Piller order, interlocutory injunction, etc. Anton Piller order is a very potent weapon in the plaintiff’s arsenal. Often dubbed as the ‘nuclear weapon’, it has the power even to destroy the defendant’s reputation and business. This potential of its being abused makes the order a force to reckon with. Generally, while granting an Anton Piller order, the Court has to balance between two conflicting interests- combating infringements of IPR and safeguarding the defendant’s right to privacy and privilege against self-incrimination. In this paper, various aspects of Anton Piller order, like jurisdictional aspect, requirements, safeguards against abuse, etc., through English cases are analyzed. In the end, scope of the application of Anton Piller order in Indian legal system through discussion of cases and various Acts is examined.
Anton Piller Order in UK -The Anton Piller order is a form of discovery preservation granted on ex parte application. It can comprise of an injunction to restrain infringement, permission to enter defendant's premises to inspect documents and remove originals or copies of the originals, permission to remove allegedly infringing goods, and an injunction to restrain defendant from disclosing contents of the injunction to third parties for a specified period. The purpose of the order was explained in Yousuf v Salama, where Lord Denning MR observed that the order intends to prevent the danger of destruction of evidence.
Q. What is the purpose of the Anton Piller order?
2 videos|10 docs|83 tests
|
2 videos|10 docs|83 tests
|