first_imgUnga Group Limited ( listed on the Nairobi Securities Exchange under the Food sector has released it’s 2020 annual report.For more information about Unga Group Limited ( reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Unga Group Limited ( company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Unga Group Limited (  2020 annual report.Company ProfileUnga Group Limited is an agricultural holding company in Kenya which mills wheat and maize and processes baked products and animal nutrition and health products. The company is divided in products produced for human consumption and animal consumption. The human consumption division produces a range of wheat flour products which include chapatti, mandazi, brown bread, maize meal, porridge and amana. The animal consumption division manufactures a range of animal food and mineral supplements. Unga Limited is a subsidiary company which produces feeds, minerals, premixes, animal health products and offers technical services to the agricultural sector in Kenya. Other subsidiary companies include Unga Farm Care (EA) Limited, Ennsvalley Bakery Limited and Unga Millers (Uganda) Limited. Over 90% of products are produced for the Kenyan domestic market with some exports to Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda. The company head office is in Nairobi, Kenya. Unga Group Limited is listed on the Nairobi Securities Exchangelast_img read more

first_imgThe Lloyds Bank share price has crashed, but I’d rather buy this FTSE 100 stock Manika Premsingh | Tuesday, 19th May, 2020 | More on: LLOY SVT I would like to receive emails from you about product information and offers from The Fool and its business partners. Each of these emails will provide a link to unsubscribe from future emails. More information about how The Fool collects, stores, and handles personal data is available in its Privacy Statement. Simply click below to discover how you can take advantage of this. Things keep getting bleaker for the already beleaguered Lloyds Banking Group (LSE: LLOY), whose share price has seen quite the drop. It fell below 30p early last week and has stayed there as of last close at time of writing.Bad news about the economy has a direct effect on the prospects of all banks, and there’s been a lot of that in recent weeks. However, things were looking bad for the Lloyds Bank share price even before coronavirus entered the picture.5G is here – and shares of this ‘sleeping giant’ could be a great way for you to potentially profit!According to one leading industry firm, the 5G boom could create a global industry worth US$12.3 TRILLION out of thin air…And if you click here we’ll show you something that could be key to unlocking 5G’s full potential…No change in outlook for the Lloyds Bank share priceNevertheless, the latest decline could have been a good reason to reconsider the stock, provided it indicated underlying changes in the bank’s story. But that’s not the case. On the contrary, it’s a continuation of the existing challenges. And for that reason, I don’t think there’s any reason to change outlook on the Lloyds Bank share price.There are many other FTSE 100 stocks that are much better placed than Lloyds Bank as long-term investments. Defensive stocks such as healthcare and utilities are standout options. Stable demand in uncertain timesOne utility stock I like is water and sewerage company Severn Trent (LSE: SVT). Contrary to the Lloyds Bank stock, it has seen a swift recovery in share price since the worst of the stock market crash. But there’s more to the SVT story. As a utility company, its demand is relatively secure. At the end of March, SVT said that there’s been little impact on its business performance so far because of Covid-19. This puts it in an enviable position at a time when most other companies are struggling to keep up their revenues or worse, maintain operations in lockdown. Dependable passive incomeFurther, while other FTSE 100 companies’ dividends have been cut or suspended, SVT stands out again. With a dividend yield of 4%, it might not have been a coveted dividend stock a few months ago, but things have changed dramatically since. Lloyds Bank, for instance, along with all other banks, was encouraged by the Bank of England to reconsider its dividend policy. Which they did, in keeping with the expected severe impact on their balance sheet. As a result, it’s good to just know that there are at least some stocks that still provide decent, dependable passive income.Electricity and natural gas provider National Grid is also still paying dividends. It actually has a higher dividend yield than SVT at 5.1%. Like SVT it has also mentioned that there’s been no material impact on its financial performance from Covid-19. But, with business demand coming to a standstill, electricity usage has declined. This in turn is likely to impact NG. I haven’t any such reports for the water and sewerage segment, at least not so far. Foregoing a higher yield seems appropriate right now for greater dependability.In any case, utility stocks look much more attractive than the Lloyds Bank share price to me now. Click here to claim your copy now — and we’ll tell you the name of this Top US Share… free of charge! Our 6 ‘Best Buys Now’ Shares See all posts by Manika Premsinghcenter_img Renowned stock-picker Mark Rogers and his analyst team at The Motley Fool UK have named 6 shares that they believe UK investors should consider buying NOW.So if you’re looking for more stock ideas to try and best position your portfolio today, then it might be a good day for you. Because we’re offering a full 33% off your first year of membership to our flagship share-tipping service, backed by our ‘no quibbles’ 30-day subscription fee refund guarantee. “This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997” Manika Premsingh has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Lloyds Banking Group. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Enter Your Email Address I’m sure you’ll agree that’s quite the statement from Motley Fool Co-Founder Tom Gardner.But since our US analyst team first recommended shares in this unique tech stock back in 2016, the value has soared.What’s more, we firmly believe there’s still plenty of upside in its future. In fact, even throughout the current coronavirus crisis, its performance has been beating Wall St expectations.And right now, we’re giving you a chance to discover exactly what has got our analysts all fired up about this niche industry phenomenon, in our FREE special report, A Top US Share From The Motley Fool. Image source: Getty Images. last_img read more

first_imgScout SchultzAtlanta, Sept. 20 — Late Saturday night, Sept. 16, the life of 21-year-old Scout Schultz was cut short by a single bullet to the heart by a Georgia Tech campus police officer.Schultz was a deeply politically conscious activist and president of the LGBTQI Pride Alliance at conservative Georgia Tech University.Schultz identified as nonbinary and intersex and used “them,” “they” and “their” as personal pronouns.At an educational institution that has a dual reputation for intense academic competition and fraternity-style hard partying, many students can feel isolated. Gender nonconforming youth particularly feel the sting of disparaging comments and looks.While Schultz was an accomplished student, a remarkable leader and was much loved and respected, they had suffered from depression and anxiety while trying to handle all the oppressions of their life under capitalism.It now appears that Schultz called 911 and reported a person with a knife acting strangely, perhaps drunk, in a parking lot near their dorm. The physical description Schultz gave was of themself.Four campus police responded to the call and came upon Schultz, walking aimlessly in the deserted parking lot. In their hand was a multiuse tool. The tool had a knife blade that was closed.The video shows police positioned around Schultz, yelling orders to “drop the knife.” As the student turned toward Officer Tyler Beck, standing behind the parking gate arm, some 20 feet away, the officer shot Schultz. Beck says he feared for his life.Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) officials say three suicide notes were found in Schultz’s dorm room.On Monday night, Sept. 18, hundreds and hundreds of students, friends, family and community allies attended a very brief and sanitized candlelight vigil for Scout Schultz on the Georgia Tech campus. There was no mention by the speakers that the police had killed Schultz.LGBTQI students express outrageWith the official ceremony over, out of the darkness came the anguished voices of other LGBTQI students who expressed outrage and anger over Schultz’s murder, the lack of mental health resources on the high-pressure campus, and the overwhelming failure to recognize the needs of LGBTQI students for basic things like bathrooms and dorm assignments. Many called for action; others for love and communication.A group emerged from the larger crowd with banners reading “Fightback” and “End Police Violence.” After chanting for a while, they determined to march to the campus police station.One hundred or more people, mostly Georgia Tech students, filled the street leading to the police building, followed by police cars.As the crowd milled around the area, fireworks went off and flares were lit. When a police car erupted in flames, people scattered and ran, with police in pursuit, and some were tackled to the ground.Three were arrested.Vincent Castillenti, known as a CopWatch activist, 22-year-old Georgia State student Jacob Wilson and Georgia Tech Black transwoman Cassandra Monden were arraigned on Sept. 20 on a variety of felony and misdemeanor charges. Their bonds range from $20,000 to $107,500.All are barred from the Georgia Tech campus, including Monden, a registered student. Wilson will be fitted for an ankle monitor and is to be confined to his home from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m.Beck is on paid administrative leave and the GBI is in charge of the investigation to determine whether lethal force was justified.Georgia Tech president, G.P. “Bud” Peterson, has publicly blamed “outside agitators” for the “violence” and there is a concerted campaign led by the Student Government Association and fraternities to “show love” to the campus police department.None of these attempts to blunt the outrage over the murder of a mentally distraught student by an armed campus police force can alter the widening struggle against all forms of state repression and oppression.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thislast_img read more

first_img It is all Downhill From Here for Corn and Soybean Prices SHARE By Gary Truitt – Apr 10, 2014 SHARE Hueber said that Wednesday’s report shows, overall, a good world supply of feed grain that will also keep a lid on corn prices, “World coarse grain stocks were increased .72 MMT to 192.18, compared with 164.73 in 2012/13 and 166.54 in 2011/12. In both cases, this will be the largest stocks to usage ratio since 2009/2010.” Home Indiana Agriculture News It is all Downhill From Here for Corn and Soybean Prices About The Hueber ReportThe Hueber Report is a grain marketing advisory service and brokerage firm that places the highest importance on risk management and profitable farming.Informed farmers turn to The Hueber Report:·         For actionable marketing recommendations that drive revenue to their farm·         When they face the very real risks modern agribusiness presents·         When they desire top of the line risk management software to help stay on top of their farm operation·         When they are tired of traditional marketing services that pay no attention to profitability, only to price·         When they want the help of a team of dedicated professionals with nearly a century of combined experience working on their behalfWe provide real marketing advice that includes a daily market update, in-depth analysis of the futures markets, comprehensive weekly and monthly newsletters, immediate sale recommendations, and GrainGridge software.  The Hueber Report continues to grow because we are able to identify and advise on the true needs of today’s farmer.  Never before have producers faced headwinds like we believe they will in the coming years.  We are prepared for this challenging environment and believe you can be too. Facebook Twittercenter_img After Wednesday’s USDA report, the market may have put in the highs for corn and soybean prices.  There were some bullish surprises in the Supply and Demand report and the futures market reacted accordingly. But prices moved back lower on Thursday, and Dan Hueber with the Hueber Report says we have put in the highs on corn prices, “It is pretty hard to justify corn moving a lot higher than it has.” He told HAT the $5.20 range that prices moved into after the USDA report will probably to the top in the market. “Unless we have problems with planting or production, I think we have priced in what we know about the supply and demand picture for the 2014 crop,” he added. Of course, a major production problem this year could change all that. He told HAT it is hard to get the market too excited about planting delays this spring, “I don’t see the market getting too excited until we get to May. We know when the conditions are right we can put a lot of crop in the ground very quickly.”  Facebook Twitter Previous articleHarsh Winter and Rail Delays Impact Ethanol IndustryNext articleNew Purdue Center for Commercial Ag Director Outlines Mission Gary Truitt It is all Downhill From Here for Corn and Soybean Prices Hueber also thinks that an increase in US soybean planted acres will likely keep bean prices from going much higher, “You look at the nearby beans and we pushed above the $15 mark on Wednesday but fell back below $15 on Thursday.” He sees a soybean high water mark of about $15.25 and a new crop high of  $12.00 to $12.50 as about the best we are going to see.last_img read more

first_imgChoosing TCU as a religious minority student The College of Science and Engineering Dean, Phil Hartman, retires after 40 consecutive years Linkedin Linkedin Facebook Kaylee Bowers ReddIt Facebook TCU senior Bryan Tony moderates student debt discussion, Wednesday, Jan. 27, 2016, in Fort Worth, Texas. + posts Previous articleThe Skiff: January 28, 2016Next articleTCU Rhino Initiative charges forward to stop poaching Kaylee Bowers RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Kaylee Bowers From Muscat to Fort Worthcenter_img ReddIt Kaylee Bowers Kaylee Bowers TCU places second in the National Student Advertising Competition, the highest in school history Twitter Bollywood cardio class spreads cultural awareness Texas Frog Camps are now free for incoming students Twitter printPanelists encouraged students to only take out as many loans as they need to pay tuition and other essential costs at Wednesday’s student debt discussion. Students take on unnecessary debt, said keynote speaker José Eduardo Sánchez, the Southern regional organizing director for Young Invincibles, a political advocacy group for young adults. Sánchez was joined by Timeka Gordon, the TCU Community Scholars program director; Chelsea Alexander, a TCU alumna and a senior financial advisor with Merrill Lynch; and Mike Scott, the TCU director of scholarship and finance.Sánchez said college tuition and fees have increased over 1,000 percent since 1978, making student debt a pressing issue for the country.“The problem is worsened because students do not have the knowledge to refuse tuition debt they do not need,” Sánchez said.If undergraduates overspend now, their debt will skyrocket during graduate school, where loans are the majority of financial aid, Scott said. By returning just $20 a month, students can get into the habit of repaying loans, which lessens the possibility defaulting.Sánchez said Young Invincibles wants to bring more students into related policy discussions. “The student voice is essential in achieving any real long-lasting change,” Sánchez said. Senior economics and political science double major Bryan Tony planned the event with the John V. Roach Honors College, the Government Affairs and Advocacy Program, and Student Development Services’ “One Million Reasons” financial literacy campaign. Tony said he was pleased with the discussion. “I was really surprised by the number of faculty and staff that came out to the event, and then to see a large population of community scholars, honors students, people who are engaged with the financial literacy program—it was really neat to bring all those groups together,” Tony said. Tony said he thinks this is the start of the student debt discussion on TCU’s campus. Rachel Monsees, a junior mathematics and economics double major, responds to the discussion.  Kaylee Bowers TCU Frog Camps returning to more traditional look this summerlast_img read more

first_imgLinkedin Google employees, who walked off the job to protest the internet company’s lenient treatment of executives accused of sexual misconduct, listen to speakers during a protest rally on Thursday, Nov. 1, 2018, in New York. Employees staged walkouts at offices from Tokyo to Singapore to London. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews) Twitter Corinne Hildebrandt Abortion access threatened as restrictive bills make their way through Texas Legislature What we’re reading: Chauvin found guilty in Floyd case, Xi to attend Biden’s climate change summit ReddIt printWe’re back and we’re reading – everything from the the “Washington Post” to the “Wall Street Journal.” We’re trying to help you keep up with the rapid pace of politics and policy. Today we’ve got an update on early voter turnout and unrest in the Silicon Valley.Synagogue shooter pleads not guiltyThe man charged with the killing of 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue pleaded not guilty.Robert Bowers was indicted by a federal grand jury on 44 counts, connected to what has said to be the deadliest U.S. attack on Jews.Bower’s lawyers asked for a jury trial, but no court date was set. Prosecutors said the process could take up to four weeks.Skyrocketing ballots Early voters are casting their ballots in record numbers this midterm season, reaching new highs in many states. According to the Washington Post, voters in at least 17 states have surpassed the early and absentee voting numbers from the 2014 midterm election. Some states are even on pace to double their numbers from four years ago.The spark in voter turnout mirrors the heightened interest among Democrats, who showed patterns of staying home in 2014.Looks like the battle for control of the Congress has everyone keeping a close eye. Anti-immigration amplificationAs Election Day nears, President Trump is tightening the border in response to an anticipated migrant caravan.Trump called for the deployment of nearly 15,000 troops to the Mexican border. The president is facing some backlash as some see it as a way for him to hone in on core supporters in tight races for the House and Senate. This order doesn’t come long after Trump’s plan to sign an executive order ending automatic citizen for children born in the U.S. was announced.Silicon Valley is speaking upWomen at Google have had enough. Many of the internet giant’s employees are walking out of the door as a protest for gender equality. According to the New York Times, Google has a history of gender inequality as only 31 percent of employees are female.Google offices from around the world are demanding things like transparency, accountability and structural change as one protestor stated. Young model adds to Weinstein’s accusationsHarvey Weinstein is back in the hot seat. Weinstein is facing new allegations of sexually assaulting a 16-year-old aspiring model. As part of the class action lawsuit, the model said Weinstein promised her an ensemble role in a movie in exchange for sexual demands.This adds to the 10 women who have already accused Weinstein of similar activity earlier this year. It’s getting hot in hereThe Earth’s oceans have been soaking up the sun as researchers note higher than normal ocean temperatures.This means that more heat is being kept within the planet’s climate system and not escaping to space leading to a faster than predicted rise in Earth’s temperature.According to the Washington Post, nations may have even less time to cut high emission levels of carbon dioxide. Uh oh.That’s all we have for today. Check back tomorrow for more. Fort Worth B-Cycle looks to attract more riders Corinne Hildebrandt What we’re reading: Former Vice President dies at 93, Chad President killed on frontlines What we’re reading: Arrivals in Argentina Parking lot closures cause new problems for students ReddIt Previous articleGas leak repaired: King Family Commons cleared after evacuationNext articleA push to spark interest among future voters Corinne Hildebrandt RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Linkedin Corinne Hildebrandt is a sophomore journalism major and sociology minor from Wayne, Illinois. She enjoys staying active and has a difficult time sitting still for long periods of time. When she’s not reporting, Corinne is most likely on the go exploring the many restaurants (and ice cream shops) that Fort Worth has to offer. Facebook Twitter What we’re reading: Controversy in D.C. Corinne Hildebrandt + posts Corinne Hildebrandt Corinne Hildebrandt Facebooklast_img read more

first_imgKnow the Law[Order 8 Rule 1 CPC ] Time Limit To File Written Statement : Mandatory Or Directory Gurpreet Singh Kahlon26 April 2020 7:30 PMShare This – xDoes Desh Raj v. Balkishan clarify whether the time limit to file Written Statement is Mandatory or Directory?A. The Ninety Day Limit is Directory: A catena of judgements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, interpreting Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), had settled the position that the requirement to file a Written Statement within 30 days (extendable to 90 days) of receipt of summons is directory and not a mandatory requirement. As a…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginA. The Ninety Day Limit is Directory: A catena of judgements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, interpreting Order 8 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), had settled the position that the requirement to file a Written Statement within 30 days (extendable to 90 days) of receipt of summons is directory and not a mandatory requirement. As a result, litigators have long used the language used of the twin decisions of the Supreme Court of India (Kailash v. Nankhu (2005) 4 SCC 480 (“Kailash”) and Salem Advocates Bar Association, T.N. v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 344 (“Salem Advocates”)), i.e. that procedural law is the handmaid of justice and not its mistress. These decisions were particularly useful when filing applications to condone a delay in filing Written Statements beyond the outer limit of 90 days set out in the CPC. In those two decisions, the Supreme Court has held that the extendable period of 90 days within which to file a Written Statement does not carry any penal consequences. Further, it held that Order 8 Rule 1, CPC should not be interpreted to mean that in no event whatsoever can a Written Statement not be taken on record beyond the extendable time period of 90 days from receipt of summons. Accordingly, in both Kailash and Salem Advocates, it has been held that Order 8 Rule 1, CPC, being in the domain of procedural law, is directory and not mandatory. Of course, in both Kailash and Salem Advocates, the Supreme Court was careful to add that a decision to condone delay beyond the 90 day period is not to be passed in a routine manner and that such discretion is to be exercised by the Court only in exceptionally hard cases. Subsequently in Atcom Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Y.A. Chunawala (2018) 6 SCC 639 (“Atcom”) the Supreme Court again reiterated its findings in Kailash and Salem Advocates. Further, in Atcom, the Supreme Court reiterated its prior holding that when seeking condonation of delay beyond the 90 day period set out in Order 8 Rule 1, CPC the Defendant is required to furnish a proper and satisfactory explanation. It was further held in Atcom that merely because Order 8 Rule 1, CPC is directory does not mean that a Defendant can take as much time as desired or is absolved from giving convincing and cogent reasons for the delay beyond 90 days. A decision to condone delay beyond the 90 day extendable period is not to be granted in a mechanical fashion merely because of the earlier decisions that Order 8 Rule 1, CPC is directory and not mandatory. A contradiction can be drawn here, between the decisions of the  Supreme Court in Kailash, Salem Advocates and Atcom, and the decision in Union of India v. Popular Construction Co. (2001) 8 SCC 470 (“Popular Constructions”). In Popular Constructions, the effect of the use of the words “but not thereafter” in relation to the time limit for filing an appeal against an Arbitral Award was in question. The Supreme Court came to hold that use of the words “but not thereafter” in the proviso to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) amounted to an express exclusion within the meaning of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 (“Limitation Act”) and would bar the application of Section 4 of the Limitation Act. As such, it was held that a Court could not entertain an application to set aside an award beyond the extendable period provided in the proviso to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. It was held that any other interpretation would render the words “but not thereafter” in the said provision otiose. B. Effect of the Commercial Courts Act: In 2015, the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (“Commercial Courts Act”) was brought in to force. By way of Section 16, the Commercial Courts Act amended various portions of the CPC in a legislative attempt to bring about a more efficacious and speedy resolution to matters which fall in to the category of “Commercial Disputes” – as defined in Section 2(c) of the Commercial Courts Act. Pertinently, in terms of Section 21 of the Commercial Courts Act its provisions shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. This non-obstante clause is of particular importance when considering the amendments made to Order 8 Rules 1 & 10, CPC. By way of the Commercial Courts Act, certain amendments were made and provisos were inserted as a result of which the period for filing of a Written Statement in Commercial Disputes, in terms of Order 8 Rule 1, CPC, was extended from 90 days to a maximum of 120 days from receipt of summons. However, in case a Written Statement is not filed within 120 days of receipt of summons, the Defendant shall forfeit the right to file its Written Statement and the Court is not permitted to allow such a Written Statement to be taken on record. Further, by way of another proviso (inserted by the Commercial Courts Act to Order 8 Rule 10, CPC) the Court is not permitted to make an order to extend the time for filing of a Written Statement even when pronouncing judgment or passing other orders under Order 8 Rule 10, CPC. Soon after the coming in to force of the Commercial Courts Act the  High Court of Delhi in Oku Tech Pvt Ltd v. Sangeet Agarwal and Others 2016 SCC OnLine Del 6601 (“Oku Tech”) considered a case falling under the ambit of the Commercial Courts Act. In Oku Tech, a Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi held that in commercial disputes the legislative intention is to take away the discretion of the Court in extending time to file a Written Statement after the amendments to the CPC made by Section 16 of the Commercial Courts Act. Accordingly, the Court could not condone a delay or allow a Written Statement to be brought on record beyond the extendable 120 day period. Thereafter, the  Supreme Court of India, while examining the amendments to the CPC after the coming in to force of the Commercial Courts Act, held in SCGContracts India Pvt. Ltd. v. K.S. Chamankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. (2019) 12 SCC 210 (“SCG Contracts”) that no extension of time can be granted for filing of the Written Statement beyond 120 days. In SCG Contracts, the Supreme Court of India concurred with the view taken by the High Court of Delhi in Oku Tech by holding that: ” … the consequences of forfeiting a right to file the Written Statement; non-extension of any further time; and the fact that the Court shall not allow the Written Statement to be taken on record all points to the fact that the earlier law on Order VIII Rule 1 on the filing of Written Statement under Order VIIII Rule 1 has now been set at naught.” However, perhaps more important is, the observation in SCG Contracts that the inherent powers granted to a Court under Section 151, CPC cannot be used to circumvent the “clear, definite and mandatory provisions of Order V Read with Order VIII Rule 1 and 10”. More recently, the  Supreme Court has held in Desh Raj v. Balkishan (Dead) Through Proposed Legal Representative Ms. Rohini (2020) 2 SCC 708 (“Desh Raj”) that after the Commercial Courts Act has come in to force, two regimes now govern civil procedure. First, for Commercial Disputes (as defined in Section 2(c) of the Commercial Courts Act) the regime set out in terms of the amendments introduced to the CPC by Section 16 of the Commercial Courts Act will govern. Second, another regime continues to exist under the unamended CPC for all other disputes that do not fall within the ambit of Section 2(c) of the Commercial Courts Act. In Desh Raj, the Supreme Court clarified that for Commercial Disputes the decision in Oku Tech followed in SCG Contracts would govern and the amended provisions of the CPC would make the extendable time period of 120 days to file a Written Statement mandatory with no discretion to the Court to condone delay beyond this 120 day period. However, the ratio in those decisions would not cover suits which do not fall under the ambit of the Commercial Courts Act. Therefore, in non-commercial matters the decision in Atcom (following, as it does the decisions in Kailash and Salem Advocates) would continue to govern the field. Accordingly, for non-commercial disputes the extendable period of 90 days to file a Written Statement continues to be directory in nature. However, in suits governed by the unamended CPC a Defendant seeking condonation of delay beyond 90 days would still be required to furnish convincing and cogent reasons for the Court to exercise its discretion to condone such delay. C. A Special Law Prevails over a General Law: The decision in Desh Raj appears to have clarified that, in non-commercial disputes, the requirement to file a Written Statement within the 90 day extendable period in terms of Order 8 Rule 1, CPC is directory and not mandatory. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that the CPC, being a general law would not prevail where the procedure regarding time limits to file pleadings is governed by a special law, e.g. High Court Acts and Rules framed thereunder or the Letters Patent of a High Court. This is in keeping with the principle that the provisions of a special law will prevail over those of a general law. Further, it is important to keep in mind that rules made under a statute must be treated for all purposes of construction or obligation exactly as if they were in the Act and are to be of the same effect as if contained in the Act (See: State of U.P. & Ors v. Babu Ram Upadhya AIR 1961 SC 751 at paragraph 23). Further, the Supreme Court of India has long held that when rules are validly framed, they should be treated as a part of the Act (See: Chief Forest Conservator (Wildlife) & Ors. v. Nisar Khan (2003) 4 SCC 595 at paragraph 19). Pertinently, the Supreme Court, prior to the coming in to force of the Commercial Courts Act, has held in Iridium India Telecom Ltd. v. Motorola Inc. (2005) 2 SCC 145 (“Iridium”) that the proviso to Order 8 Rule 1, CPC would not apply to suits before the Original Side of the Bombay High Court. It was further held that such suits would continue to be governed by the Bombay High Court Original Side Rules as they have been framed in accordance with Section 129, CPC (power of High Courts to make rules as to their original civil procedure) and the relevant Letters Patent for the High Court. For this reason, these rules would benefit from the saving provision contained in Section 4(1), CPC, i.e. that nothing in the CPC shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any: (i) special or local law now in force, or (ii) any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or (iii) any special form of procedure prescribed, by or under any other law for the time being in force. Another example of such a special law (which would prevail over the provisions of Order 8 Rule 1, CPC and its various provisos) that applies to non-commercial disputes are the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 (“Delhi HC Rules”). Chapter VII of the Delhi HC Rules deal with the time limits for filing of Written Statements and Replications. Interestingly, under Chapter VII, Rule 2 a Defendant is required to file a Written Statement within 30 days of the date of service of summons, or within the time provided by the Delhi HC Rules, CPC or the Commercial Courts Act – whichever is applicable. Chapter VII, Rule 3 then goes on to state that all Written Statements are to be filed together with an affidavit of admission/denial of documents and if not so done the Written Statement will not be taken on record. Interestingly, Chapter VII Rule 4 permits the Court (on an application demonstrating sufficient cause) to extend the time for filing of a Written Statement beyond 30 days for a period not exceeding 90 days, but not thereafter. So far this is in line with the existing provisions of the CPC. However, the same Rule then requires the Defendant to be burdened with costs (as deemed appropriate by the Court) for such extension of time. The rule also explicitly states that the Written Statement will not be taken on record during this extended time period unless costs have been paid and the admission/denial affidavit has been filed. Lastly, the Joint Registrar of the High Court has been given the power to pass orders closing the right to file Written Statement in case no Written Statement is filed at all within the extended 90 day period. Similar, but not identical limits for filing a Replication and mandatory requirements for closure of the right to file the Replication, is contained in Chapter VII Rule 5 of the Delhi HC Rules. As such, the various rules in Chapter VII of the Delhi HC Rules appear to travel beyond the merely directory nature of the CPC towards making filing of a Written Statement/Replication within the extendable time period mandatory in nature. Buttressing this view is the inclusion of the words “but not thereafter” in Chapter VII Rule 4 of the Delhi HC Rules. This mirrors the wording of the proviso to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. As noted above, this provision of the Arbitration Act and the specific words “but not thereafter” were interpreted as mandatorily closing the right to file an appeal beyond the extendable time period provided in Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Popular Constructions. The High Court of Delhi has also recently had opportunity to interpret the various provisions of Chapter VII of the Delhi HC Rules. Some recent judgments have sought to interpret the stringent time limit requirements and the ability of the Court and the Joint Registrar to close the right to file a Written Statement or Replication if they are not filed within the extendable period or without an affidavit of Admission/Denial. In relation to the requirement to file the affidavit of Admission/Denial along with a Written Statement a Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi in Unilin Beheer B.V. v. Balaji Action Buildwell : 250 (2019) DLT 478 (“Unilin”) has held that a Written Statement not filed together with an affidavit of admission/denial shall not be taken on record. Another Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi then held in Odeon Builders Pvt Ltd. v. NBCC (India) Limited 2019 SCC OnLine Del 10795 (“Odeon Builders”) that the use of the words “but not thereafter” in Chapter VII Rule 5 excluded the grant of further time to file a Replication and affidavit of admission/denial of documents after expiry of the extendable period of 45 days. It further held that this time period (30 days extendable by another 15 days) is mandatory with no power being granted for extension thereof. Subsequently, another Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi relied on the decisions in Unilin and Odeon Builders to hold that timelines set in the Delhi HC Rules for filing of replication and affidavit of admission/denial are mandatory. See: Atlanta Limited v. National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11276 (“Atlanta Limited”). All of these decisions are noteworthy because, despite being Commercial Disputes, they rely on the Delhi HC Rules in order to arrive at the conclusion that the time limits for filing of Written Statements/Replications are mandatory. Although all of these decisions were made before the clarification set out in Desh Raj, it appears that even in non-commercial suits before the Delhi HC (or perhaps any other Court with similarly stringent rules of procedure) the time period within which to file a Written Statement or Replication will be mandatory and not merely directory. D. Conclusion: From a review of the above it becomes apparent that the Supreme Court has clarified that for non-commercial suits governed by the unamended provisions of the CPC, the provisions of Order 8 Rule 1, CPC are directory and not mandatory in nature. However, if a special law exists to govern the procedure for and exercise of original civil jurisdiction in a particular Court (most notably in High Courts exercising Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction) then, any mandatory time limits for filing of Written Statements contained therein would prevail over of the unamended provisions of Order 8 Rule 1, CPC. The High Court of Delhi in its three recent judgments (Unilin, Odeon and Atlanta Limited) has already provided parties with the warning that the time limits for filing of Written Statements and Replications are to be respected. It therefore remains to be seen whether any challenge will be mounted to these three decisions in light of the clarification made by the Supreme Court in Desh Raj. Will the Supreme Court now be required to clarify that there are in fact three regimes governing civil procedure? One under the Commercial Courts Act, another in terms of the specific rules framed by individual courts and a third under the unamended CPC for courts where no specific time limits have been set out in its rules of procedure? In the meantime, as a matter of abundant caution, litigators would be wise to ensure adherence to the the time limits set out in the rules of procedure in their respective courts, whether it be in terms of the Commercial Courts Act or the specific Rules framed for a High Court exercising Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction.  (The author is an advocate practicing before the Supreme Court of India, the High Court of Delhi and is currently a Managing Associate in the dispute resolution practice at L&L Partners, Law Offices, New Delhi. Views are strictly personal) Next Storylast_img read more

first_img Facebook Facebook DL Debate – 24/05/21 WhatsApp Harps come back to win in Waterford Homepage BannerNews There were 34 people waiting for a bed at Letterkenny University Hospital this morning – the second most overcrowded hospital in the country today.21 people were waiting on trolleys in its Emergency Department while a further 13 were waiting on wards.St. Luke’s Hospital in Kilkenny was the most overcrowded today with 36 people waiting there.Nationally, there were 350 people waiting at hospitals across the country. Journey home will be easier – Paul Hegarty Arranmore progress and potential flagged as population grows WhatsApp Twitter Google+center_img Twitter Pinterest Letterkenny Hospital second most overcrowded in Ireland today RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Google+ By News Highland – November 6, 2017 Previous articleConcern over inadequate ATM services in GlentiesNext articleGardai search for weapon used in Letterkenny murder News Highland News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24th Important message for people attending LUH’s INR clinic Pinterestlast_img read more

first_imgRiverside Police Department(NEW HOPE, Minn.) — Authorities are calling a Minnesota woman “one of the worst DUI offenders in the United States” after her seventh arrest in as many states.Police in Riverside, Illinois, arrested Tasha Lynn Schleicher, 41, of New Hope, Minnesota, April 2 and charged her with two counts of felony aggravated drunk driving, two counts of misdemeanor drunk driving, not having vehicle insurance, driving with a revoked license and transportation of open alcohol while driving.Schleicher had 11 prior arrests, all of which were DUI-related, the Riverside Police Department said in a statement. She had three active warrants from multiple states.Schleicher’s 11 children all have been taken away by the State of Minnesota, Riverside Police Chief Thomas Weitzel said.“This is one of the worse DUI offenders we have ever dealt with,” Weitzel said. “I’ve classified her as one of the worst DUI offenders in the United States.”Police said they received a call at 9:27 p.m. on April 2 that reported a woman passed out in her vehicle at a Riverside gas station.Officers found Schleicher sitting in her 2005 Nissan Maxima, which police say she apparently had tried to fill with kerosene. There was an open bottle of liquor in the front passenger seat, which witnesses told police they’d seen her drinking from.Schleicher “had bloodshot, glassy eyes, and emitted a strong odor of alcohol from her breath” and was “in total disarray,” according to police. After refusing to cooperate with a field sobriety test, she was arrested.She was “combative with officers,” lied about her name, date of birth and Social Security number, Weitzel said. She wasn’t positively identified until she was fingerprinted.Schleicher was taken to MacNeal Hospital in Berwyn after claiming to be pregnant and having a miscarriage, but the hospital found the claim to be false, authorities said.Previously, Schleicher had been arrested for driving under the influence in Kentucky, Wisconsin, Indiana, California, Oregon and Minnesota. Her outstanding warrants were from Nebraska, Idaho and Oregon.“When she was arrested in a state, she would just not show up in court unless she was held in custody,” Weitzel said. “That’s one of the reasons for so many outstanding warrants.”Weitzel asked that the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office hold Schleicher and provide “immediate social service intervention and professional medical attention for severe alcohol abuse.”It’s unclear whether Schleicher has obtained a lawyer at this time.Copyright © 2018, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.last_img read more

first_img Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. The CBI this week threw down the gauntlet to the Government over employment red tape in the run-up to next year’s General Election.It urged politicians not to promise more employment rights in the next parliament and put the cost of implementing the current raft of workplace legislation at an estimated £12.3bn.The CBI also criticised the Government for introducing its policies too quickly leaving business struggling to cope.A CBI report published this week pins the blame for excessive red tape on poor drafting and consultation, and hasty implementation. It says these shortcomings left businesses uncertain about the steps they needed to take. It also meant they had insufficient time to argue for business-friendly procedures and weeks rather than months to prepare for the policies.Director-general Digby Jones said, “Excessive red tape has caused most of the headaches rather than the rights themselves. This has led to an incalculable cost with firms diverting resources into administration and losing business opportunities.”The report’s findings come nine months after Personnel Today launched its campaign for better regulation. The campaign, in association with the Employers’ Forum on Statute and Practice, called on the Government to issue clear guidance and consultation documents, and give employers more time to respond to consultations. Jones, at the CBI, said, “It is also blindingly obvious that many firms have been struggling with the pace of the changes some of which are still to come into effect. The Government must give business a breathing space.”The report – on the impact of workplace legislation introduced since 1997 – was launched at the CBI’s national conference at Birmingham this week.Based on responses from more than 400 companies, it puts the cost of red tape created by the Working Time regulations alone at £7bn. The estimated cost of the minimum wage is put at £4.5bn.It found 55 per cent of the organisations taking part regard the amount of administration they face as unacceptable. A further 61 per cent said they had insufficient time to implement policies, while 43 per cent said ongoing administrative tasks have a significant negative impact. Nearly half (49 per cent) said red tape has diverted management time.The report adds that one in five companies cut staff as a result of the legislation it was required to implement. Some 42 per cent said it cut profit margins.By Helen Rowe Employers warn red tape is costing them billionsOn 7 Nov 2000 in Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more