Smt. Ligi, teacher of Legal Language
and Legal Writing (OP-01) came to the class in the first hour and taught the following.
1.
Bad
faith = Malafide = ദുരുദ്ദേശത്തോടെ
2.
Bail = release after arrest = ജാമ്യം
3.
Battery = physical application of force without
the consent of other person as found in U.K. Law = സമ്മതമില്ലാതെ ബലപ്രയോഗം
നടത്തൽ The
4.
Bequeath = to transfer property to another
through a will = ഒസ്യത്തു പ്രകാരം മറ്റൊരാൾക്കു വസ്തു കൈമാറുക.
5.
Bench = The seat of a Judge in a Court = കോടതിയിലെ ന്യായാധിപന്റെ
ഇരിപ്പിടം, കോടതി ബഞ്ച്
6.
Benefit of doubt = The concept that the accused
shall get the benefit if the prosecution could not prove the charge beyond
doubt = സംശയത്തിന്റെ ആനുകൂല്യം
7.
Bonafide = In good faith = ഉത്തമവിശ്വാസത്തോടെ
8.
Burden of proof = duty to prove one’s assertion
= തെളിയിക്കുവാനുള്ള
ഉത്തരവാദിത്തം
9.
Bill of Exchange = A negotiable instrument
promising payment of a sum = ബിൽ ഓഫ് എക്സ്ചേഞ്ച്
10.
Bye-law = supplementary law = നിയമാവലി
11.
Cause of action = The root cause of a litigation
= വ്യവഹാര
കാരണം
12.
Caveat = beware, warning = മുന്നറിയിപ്പ്
13.
Certiorari = A writ to quash or set aside or cancel
an order or proceedings without authority = ഒരിനം റിട്ട്
14.
Charge sheet = A record of accusation to be
proved by the prosecution = കുറ്റപത്രം
15.
Circumstancial evidence = Evidence assumed from
circumstances = സാഹചര്യ തെളിവ്
16.
Cognizance = taking note of, power of dealing a
matter judiciously = നീതിപൂർവമായ അവലോകനം
17.
Civil liberty = the right of a person guaranteed
under the constitution = പൌരസ്വാതന്ത്രം
18.
Coercion = force = ഭീഷണിപ്പെടുത്തി സമ്മതിപ്പിക്കൽ
19.
Cognate = persons related from mothers side = താവഴി
20.
Agnate = persons related from fathers side = പിതൃവഴി
21.
Collective Bargaining = the process of
bargaining rights collectively such as negotiations relating to terms and
conditions of employment carried between trade unions and employers = കൂട്ടായ വിലപേശൽ
22.
Common law = the unwritten statutes of England
based on customs and precedents = നാട്ടാചാര നിയമം
23.
The validity of evidence depends on two
principles namely 1. to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt and 2. to have
preponderance of probability.
24.
In certain circumstances, law presumes same facts.
When there is presumption by law, the burden of proof shifts from the
prosecution to the accused.
25.
High Court and Supreme Court has concurrent
jurisdiction to entertain writs.
The
first period ended there and Smt. Premsy, teacher of Constitutional Law – 1
(CP-03) came in the second period and taught the following among others.
She is our Class teacher too.
1.
While giving an introduction to moot courts Smt.
Premsy pointed out that all legal issues are questions of law. She also warned
that questions shall be asked to her only at the right time.
A
KSU campaign introduced by Nikhil and another leader informed that a reception shall
be given to all present and former students of Government Law College, Thrissur
who are elected in the recent election to the councils of local bodies
irrespective of their flag and politics. The function shall be inaugurated by
Sri. V.T. Balram, M.L.A. who was a student here five years ago. The function
shall be conducted on 25.11.2015 at 10.00 am in the auditorium.
Then
Smt. Ligi and Smt. Suma came to invite all students to the moot court. They
requested that the names of all students who want to view the moot may be given
today itself.
The
registration of the function shall start at 9.00 am and the inauguration of the
moot is scheduled at 11.00 am on 27.11.2015. Briefing session shall be
conducted in the afternoon of 27.11.2015.
Preliminary rounds shall be on 28.11.2015 morning and semis shall be
conducted in the afternoon. The finals are scheduled at 10.00 am on 29.11.2015 Sunday.
Sitting High Court Judges shall function as the judges of the moot courts and
validation function shall be held at or earlier to 2.00 pm.
Smt.
Premsy continued the class and a discussion arose to reveal that there is a
mandatory examination for enrolment as advocates for those who have a degree in
law and the freshers have to remit Rs. 10,000 /- and the retired have to remit
Rs. 50,000/- .
Then
she read out the moot problem on animal rights.
For downloads of moot regulations and moot problems CLICK HERE
The second hour ended there and Smt.
Premalatha, teacher of Law of Torts (CP-03) came to the class in the third hour
and taught the following points.
1.
Statutory authority is a complete defence.
2.
Defence is the statement filed by the defendant
to prove his innocence.
3.
If the aggrieved party has a grievance against
an officer of the state, state or a statutory authority, the aggrieved person suffering
injury has no remedy at all.
4.
The defence of statutory authority is available
when an act is done by a defendant with the authority of a statute. It is a
complete defence and the defendant is not at all liable.
5.
In the case of conditional authority, the authority
is bound to comply with such condition.
6.
For example when there is a condition to
establish small pox hospitals in remote areas from dwelling places, the officer
establishing a small pox hospital in highly populated areas is liable.
7.
If an injury is caused to B by the wrong doing
of A and A is found liable to B, then such a liability is called a tortious liability.
At
that time a campaign of Mathrukam informing the convening of a meeting of women
in the smoking corner at 1.15 am came into the class.
8.
If an injury is caused to B by the wrong doing
of A and C is found liable to B, by virtue of a relationship of C to A then
such a liability is called a vicarious liability. In this case the liability of
A and C may be joint and several.
9.
A vicarious liability is present in 1. master - servant
relationship 2. principal – agent relationship and 3. partnership relationship.
In these cases
10.
A question “Distinguish between tortios
liability and vicarious liability ” can be expected.
11.
Each member in a partnership firm is considered
to be equal. Hence a person may approach any or all members of the partnership firm
for the damage caused by the violation of his injuries.
12.
In the case of principal and agent relationship
the legal maxim “qui facit per alium, facit per se” is applicable. This maxim
means that “the act of an agent is considered as the act of the principal.”
13.
CASE LAW : Lloyd v. Grace, Smith & Co 1912
A widow, who owned two cottages and a
sum of money secured on a mortgage, being dissatisfied with the income derived
therefrom, consulted a firm of solicitors and saw their managing clerk, who
conducted the conveyancing business of the firm without supervision. Acting as
the representative of the firm he induced her to give him instructions to sell
the cottages and to call in the mortgage money, and for that purpose to give
him her deeds (for which he gave a receipt in the firm's name); and also to
sign two documents, which were neither read over nor explained to her, and
which she believed she had to sign in order to effect the sale of the cottages.
These documents were in fact a conveyance to him of the cottages and a transfer
to him of the mortgage. He then dishonestly disposed of the property for his
own benefit:-
Held, that the firm were responsible
for the fraud committed by their representative in the course of his employment.
14.
CASE LAW : State Bank Of India v. Shyama Devi,1978
The
respondent opened a Savings Bank Account being No. 90001 with the appellant's
predecessor, the Imperial Bank of India at its Allahabad Branch, having been
introduced to the Bank by one Kapil Deo
Shukhla, an employee of the bank and a close neighbour
of the respondent and a
friend of her husband, Bhagwati
Prasad. On a suspicion about the entries in the respondent's Pass Book made
by the employees of the Bank, which had
been confirming and ratifying them from time to time, the
respondent sent a notice dated August 13, 1948 to the defendant bank. The appellant bank replied by
its letter dated 14-8-1948
explaining the deposit
of several items making up to Rs.
1932-2-0 and denied the alleged deposits of Rs. 105, Rs. 4000, Rs. 8000/- and Rs. 100/said. to have been deposited through Kapil Dev Shukla. On November, 30, 1948, the respondent
filed a suit in forma pauperis for
the recovery of Rs. 1.5,547-10
As. together with pendente lite
and future interest from the
appellant's predecessors.
The supreme Court of
India held that(1) The legal principle which governs the vicarious liability of an employer for the loss caused to a customer through the misdemeanour or
negligence of an employee are
(a) The employer is not liable for the act of
the servant if the cause of the loss or
damage arose without his actual
fault or
privity or without the fault or
neglect of his agents or servants in the course. of their
employment;
(b) the damage complained of must be shown to have
been caused by any wrongful act of his
servant or agent done within the scope
or course of the servant or agent's employment even if the wrongful Act amounted to a
crime; and
(c) a master is liable
for his servants fraud
perpetrated in the
course of master's business whether the fraud was for the master's
benefit or not, if it was committed by
the servant in the course of his employment.
There is no difference in the liability of the master for wrongs
whether for fraud or any other
wrong committed by a servant in the course
of his employment and it is a
question of fact in each case
whether it was committed in the course of the employment.
The
third hour ended and Smt. Smitha, teacher of Family Law (CP-04) came in
the fourth hour.
1.
Mithakshara school of Hindu Law is based on the commentary
of Vigneswara on Yajnavalkya Smrti.
2.
Dayabhaga school of Hindu Law is based on a text
by Jimutavahana.
3.
Mithakshara school of law confers right of
property only to sons and not to daughters. A son at the time of his birth
itself acquires right in the ancestral property of his three immediate
ancestors in a lineage.
4.
In Dayabhaga a son has no right at all in the ancestral
or self acquired property of his father until his death. Thus the father or the
person holding title has the complete control over his property.
5.
In the case of self acquired property
Mithakshara school also recognizes complete right of the owner.
6.
In Mithakshara a child born in the fifth
generation has no right at all on the property held by his great great grandfather.
7.
Even if an intermediate link expires, the child
born in the fifth generation shall not acquire any property rights.
8.
The above concept is called coparcenary
relationship.
9.
Coparcenary system was abolished by law.
10.
According to Hindu Law, right by birth and right
by survival were the principles of transfer of property.
11.
In Dayabhaga school, a person may hold his property
solely for himself until his death and thereafter his wife, sons and daughters
acquire property rights
12.
Marumakkathaya has more resemblance to Dayabhaga
than Mithakshara.
13.
According to Mithakshara two persons cannot
marry if they are in sapinda relationship.
14.
Sapinda means from particles of same body.
15.
Blood relationship here is called consanguinity.
16.
If two persons have a same ancestor within seven
lines of paternal relationship or five lines of maternal relationship then they
are in sapinda relationship.
The
class of the day ended there.
