Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520
evidence law (Kishinchand Chellaram Law College)
Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])
lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PRACTICAL TRAINING JOURNAL
KASVI CHETAN THAKKAR
MOBILE NO: 9619589520
DIVISION: <B=
ROLL NO: <111=
SEMESTER: V
PRACTICAL TRAINING III
K.C.LAW COLLEGE, MUMBAI

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Index
SR.NO PARTICULARS PAGE NO

PART I
1. Submission on Moot Court Problem I – Criminal Case 3-13
Nihar Vs State of Maharashtra (Petitioner)
2. Submission on Moot Court Problem II – Civil Case 14-29
Healthy Prodcuts Lts Vs Wellness Body Ltd (Petitioner)
3 Submission on Moot Court Problem III – Constitutional Case 30-45
Ayub Khan and Others Vs Union of India (Respondent)
PART II
4 Case Comment 1: Civil Case - Maneka Gandhi Vs Union of India 46-50
(AIR 1978 SC 597)
5 Case Comment 2: Criminal Case - Joseph Shine v. Union of 51-55
India 2018 SC 1676
PART III
6 Report on Pre-Session Preparation and Client Interviewing 55-59
Techniques
7 Report on Chamber Visit 60-62

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PART I
SUBMISSION ON MOOT COURT CASE:
CRIMINAL CASE:

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
BEFORE THE HONORABLE TRIAL COURT IN THE CASE OF:
STATE OF
NIHAR
MAHARASHTRA
(PETITIONER) V (RESPONDENT)
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…………………………….……………………………..I
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………………..…………II
STATEMENT OF FACTS……………………………………………………………III
STATEMENT OF ISSUES……………………………………………………………IV
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS……………………………………………………….V
ARGUMENTS……….………………………………………………………………….VI
PRAYER…………………..…………………………………………………………..VII

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES:
Sr.No Cases Page No.

1 K.M.Nanavati Vs State of Maharashtra 1962 AIR 605 11-12
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION:
The Petitioner has approached the Hon9ble Trial Court of Maharashtra, under Article 302 of the Indian
Penal Code.
The present memorial on behalf of the petitioner sets forth the facts, contentions and arguments in
the present case

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code:
In layman9s language the unlawful killing of a human being with an evil intention by another human being
is known as murder. Legal Provisions of Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Section 302 is one of the
most important sections of the Indian Penal Code. The section provides punishment for the offence of
Murder. Section 302 states that Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death or imprisonment
for life, and shall also be liable to fine.= In other words, the Indian Penal Code prescribes only two kinds
of punishment, death sentence and imprisonment for life, out of which one shall be imposed on the accused
if found guilty of the crime and shall also be liable for fines if the court so deems necessary.
Background:
 Nihar was second in command of the Indian Naval Ship at the time posted at Indore. He married
Seema in 1999 and birthed three children from her.
 Due to his posting owing to the exigencies of his service to the Indian Navy, the couple Seema and
Nihar were living at different places, since the time of their marriage.
 Later on the couple shifted to Bombay.
 The now deceased Arjun was doing business in Automobiles in the City of Bombay. He was 34
year of age and unmarried at the time of his death.
 In the year 1990 Agni who was common friends with Nihar and Arjun, introduced them to each
other, while in Bombay.
 Nihar who was a Naval officer Serving the Indian Navy, was frequently going away from Bombay
owing to his work, leaving his wife Seema and three Children in Bombay.
 Meanwhile Nihar was out of Bombay serving the Indian Navy a friendship developed between arjun
and Nihar9s wife Seema.
 The friendship soon developed into an illicit relationship between Seema and Arjun.
 Later Nihar discovered about such illicit relationship between his wife Seema and Arjun from their
common friends. A confession was also made by his wife confirming such illicit relationship.
 This illicit relationship disturbed Nihar and on several occasions he found that Seema was not
interested in him.

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 Nihar also questioned Arjun about his relationship with his wife, where arjun also admitted to such
relationship.
 He further discussed the matter with Seema and she pleaded Nihar not to question Arjun about their
relationship.
 On another day Nihar visited Arjun and at that time Arjun stated to Nihar that he is not serious about
his relationship with Seema. This statement enraged Nihar and he threatened to shoot Arjun.
 The next day he drove his wife, children and the neighbour9s child to the cinema, dropped them
there and promised to come and pick them up at 6:00 PM, when the show ended.
 He then drove his car to his ship, as he wanted to get medicine for his sick dog, he represented to
the authorities in the ship that he wanted to draw a revolver and six rounds from the stores of the
ship as he was going to drive alone to Ahmednagar by night.
 On receiving the revolver and six cartridges, and put it inside a brown envelope. Then he drove his
car to Arjun9s office, and not finding him there, he drove to Arjun9s flat, rang the doorbell, and,
when it was opened by a servant, walked to Arjun9s bed-room, went into the bed-room and shut the
door behind him.
 Prosecution case was filed stating that Nihar planned and killed Arjun in his bedroom.
 However in Session Court as a matter of defence it was stated that that Arjun tried to grasp the
envelope and while preventing it from hurting him the revolver accidentally shot at him, thus killing
him
 After the shooting the accused that is Nihar went back to his car and drove it to the police station
where he was said to have surrendered himself.

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
STATEMENT OF ISSUES:
Issue 1:
Whether the trial court is correct in convicting the appellant of committing murder under section 302 of the
Indian penal code, 1860?
Issue 2:
Whether there has been any suppression of Evidence by the Prosecution?

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:
Appellant Nihar a Naval Officer, was put up on trial under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for
the alleged murder of his wife's paramour. The prosecution case in substance was that on the day of
occurrence his wife Seema confessed to him of her illicit intimacy with Arjun and the accused decided to
go and settle the matter with Arjun. He drove his wife and children to a cinema where he dropped them
promising to pick them up when the show ended at 6 p.m., drove to the ship and took the revolver and the
cartridges on a false pretext that he was going to as he was going drive alone to Ahmednagar by night.
Thereafter the accused went to his ship, took from its stores a revolver and cartridges on a false pretext,
loaded the same, went to Arjun9s Office, on not finding him there went to Arjun9s flat, entered his bed room
and shot him dead.
The defence, interalia, was that as his wife did not tell him if Arjun would marry her and take charge of
their children, and also that arjun had shot himself accidentally while he tried grasping the envelope.

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
ARGUMENTS:
 Nihar9s lawyers heard Seema9s confession regarding her illicit affair with Arjun post which Nihar
wanted to commit suicide, but Seema claimed she could calm him down.
 Seema did not say whether Arjun wants to marry her, and she plans to find out. Whereas as Nihar
confronted Arjun and the latter stated that he was not serious about his relationship with Seema, this
enraged Nihar.
 Next day Nihar was to travel to Ahemadnagar by the night for his professional duties, so he got his
wife and two children and the neighbour9s child off to the cinema and promised to pick them up at
6:00 PM.
 He told the ship authorities that he wanted to pull revolvers and six bullets from the spacecraft when
driving alone to Ahmed Nagar at night.
 After receiving the revolver and six cartridges, put them in a brown envelope. He drove the car to
Arjun9s office but could not find it.
 He drove to Arjun9s apartment with the door open and walked into Arjun9s bedroom and into the
bedroom.
 He also carried an envelope with a revolver. The accused saw the deceased call him a dirty pig in
the bedroom and asked if she would marry Seema and take care of the children.
 Going criticized, <Do you want to marry all the women who are sleeping with me?= The accused
was very angry and threatened to kill the dead by putting an envelope and a revolver in a nearby
cabinet.
 The deceased suddenly took action, grabbed the envelope, and the defendant said to take out the
revolver and come back.
 There was a fight between the two, and in that fight, two shots accidentally fell and killed Arjun.
After the shooting, the defendant returned to his car and went to the police station to surrender.
 Therefore, the accusations against the dead were made with serious and sudden provocations, so
even if you committed a crime, it was not a murder, but a culpable homicide not amounting to
murder.
Therefore it is submitted that, the appellant, shall not be held guilty of murder as can be seen from the
above submission.
10

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Cited Case Law:

K.M.Nanavati V State of Maharashtra 1962 AIR 605
INTRODUCTION-
A landmark case in the criminal history of India, K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra has been a case
discussed like ever since now. This judgment made its place as soon as it was pronounced. This landmark
judgement of India received unprecedented media attention as it involved Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati, a
Naval Commander who was tried for committing the murder of his wife9s lover, Mr. Prem Ahuja. Initially,
Nanavati was declared not guilty, but later the verdict was dismissed by the Bombay High Court and the
case was tried under a bench trial. This case was the last case to be heard as a jury trial in India because as
the result of this case, the government abolished the jury trials in India.
Facts of the Case:

Kevas Manekshaw Nanavati, an Indian Naval Officer shifted to Bombay in March 1959 with his family
and got to meet Prem Bhagwandas Ahuja, a businessman in Bombay. While he was out of Bombay for his
duty, Sylvia, his wife, developed an illicit relationship with Prem Ahuja. He was then confronted with the
confession of his wife when she opened with her relationship with Ahuja. Further, in the heat of his agony,
he went to his ship to procure a loaded revolver and drove himself to Prem Ahuja9s office. On not finding
him at his workplace, he then drove to his residence. After an altercation, at his residence, two shots went
off accidently and hit Ahuja. Jury voted in favour of the accused. The case was referred to hon9ble High
Court under Section 307 of The Code of Criminal Procedure. The Division Bench of the High Court went
on to declare the accused guilty under Section 302 of IPC. An appeal was finally decided by the Supreme
Court. The appellate court held that there were mis directions in the session9s court.
Issues/ Facts of the Case:

 Whether Nanavati shot Ahuja in <the heat of the moment= or whether it was a premeditated murder?
 Whether SLP (Special Leave Petition) can be entertained without fulfilling the order under Article
142?
Test of Grave and Sudden Provocation:
 Whether a reasonable man, belonging to the same class of the society as the accused, placed in the
same situation would be so provoked as to lose his self-control.
 For instance, in India words, gestures and mental background created by the previous act of the
victim may also be considered.
11

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the provocation, influence of passion arising from and
not after passion has cooled down by lapse of time, or otherwise giving scope for premeditation and
calculation.
Judgement:
It was held by the court that the conduct of the accused clearly showed that the murder committed by him
was a deliberate one and the facts of the case do not attract the provision of Exception I of section 300 of
IPC as the accused by adducing evidence failed to bring the case under General Exception of IPC.
Therefore, as a result, the court convicted Nanavati under section 302 of IPC and sentenced him of
Imprisonment for Life.
Jury Trial:
The jury in the Greater Bombay Sessions Court pronounced Nanavati as not guilty, with an 8-1 verdict.
Hon9ble Mr. Justice Ratilal Bhaichand Mehta (the Sessions Judge) considered the acquittal as perverse and
referred the case to the High Court.
The High Court Verdict:

The High Court dismissed the Jury9s verdict on the basis of the following arguments made by the
prosecutor-
 The onus of proving that it was an accident and not premeditated murder was on Nanavati.
 Sylvia9s confession, or any specific incident in Ahuja9s bedroom, or both did not amount to grave
and sudden provocation.
 The judge wrongly told the jury that the provocation can also come from a third person.
 The jury was not instructed that Nanavati9s defence had to be proved, to the extent that there is no
reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonable person.
Supreme Court:
The SC upheld the decision of the High court on the following grounds:
 As per the defence case, the accused was thinking of the future of his wife and a child which
indicates that he had not only regained his senses but also was planning for the future.
 The time lapse between the confession and murder was sufficient to regain his self-control.
 The mere fact that before the shooting the accused abused the deceased and the abuse provoked an
equally abusive reply could not conceivably be a provocation for the murder.
12

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PRAYER:
Wherefore, in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced, reasons given and authorities cited, it is
most humbly prayed before this Hon9ble Court, that it may be pleased to:
A. Declare that in case of any evidence having been supressed be found out for the purpose of justice
B. Also, pass any other relief that the Hon9ble Court may be pleased to grant in favour of the petitioner in
the interest of justice, equity and good conscience, all of which is respectfully submitted. And for this
act of kindness the petitioners as are duty bound shall ever pray.
13

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
SUBMISSION ON MOOT COURT CASE II

CIVIL CASE:
14

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
HEALTHY BODY BODY WELLNESS

PRODUCTS LTD PRODUCTS LTD
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
ARGUMENTS……….………………………………………………………………….VI
PRAYER…………………..…………………………………………………………..VII
15

lOMoARcPSD|31060264

1 Horlicks Limited & Anr. vs Zydus Wellness Products Limited on 14 May, 2020 24-26
2 Havells India Ltd & Anr vs Amritanshu Khaitan & Ors on 17 March, 2015 27-28
The Petitioner has approached the Hon9ble Trial Court of Maharashtra, under Section 3 of the Food Safety
and standard packaging and labelling Regulation, 2011 and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India,
1949.
The present memorial on behalf of the petitioner sets forth the facts, contentions and arguments in
the present case
16

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens the right to freedom of speech and
expression. The law states that, <all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression=.
Under Article 19(2) <reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of this right for certain
purposes.
The freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) includes the right to express one9s views and opinions at any
issue through any medium, e.g. by words of mouth, writing, printing, picture, film, movie etc. It thus
includes the freedom of communication and the right to propagate or publish opinion. But this right is
subject to reasonable restrictions being imposed under Article 19(2). Free expression cannot be equated or
confused with a license to make unfounded and irresponsible allegations against the judiciary.
Also Section 3 of the Food Safety and standard packaging and labelling Regulation, 2011of advertisement
"means any audio or visual publicity, representation or pronouncement made by means of any light, sound,
smoke, gas, print, electronic media, internet or website and includes through any notice, circular, label,
wrapper, invoice or other documents=.
Background:
 HealthyBody is one of the key brands in the health food drinks variety available in India. They are
a renowned cooperation and adopted the trademark Healthy Body in the year 1999.
 It is a brand owned by the Healthy Products Ltd.
 It claims to have been clinically proven to make kids who drink this beverage regularly taller,
stronger, and sharper.
 It further asserts that regular consumption of Healthybody combined with a healthy diet as well as
a healthy lifestyle can lead to quantifiable enhancement in the growth and development of the child
along with better concentration power and also increases and improves micronutrient status and
promotes physical and mental development in children.
 Healthy body is being sold in many countries around the world in different formulation in order to
cater the needs of the varying consumers and its drink is seen as a complete health drink amongst
the consumers.
 Swasth, on the other hand, is a powdered milk energy drink which is again preferred in many Indian
households.
 It is a brand owned Body Wellness Products Limited.
17

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 It is a company incorporated in India and is a competitor of HealthyBody drink.

 In mid-2020 Swasth aired an advertisement and declared that one cup of Swasth was equivalent to
two cups of Healthybody, thus providing the same amount of protein in one cup of Swasth that
Healthybody furnished in two cups.
 A suit was filed in the Mumbai District Consumer Redressal Forum and plaintiff mentioned in their
plaint that the said TVC generated incertitude and perplexity in the minds of the customers by giving
a fallacious implication to them regarding their product thereby amounting to undue influence upon
the minds of the consumers. Thus the advertisement is not true and gives misleading message to the
public in general.
18

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Issue 1:
Whether the opposite party9s advertisement/TVC attempts to mislead the consumer?
Issue 2:
Whether the opposite party released the TVC with the intention to criticise the former9s brand?
19

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
The appellant healthy products limited a renowned brand owned a brand of drinl called HealthyBody which
is one of the key brands in the health food drinks variety available in India. It is a brand owned by the
Healthy Products Ltd. It claims to have been clinically proven to make kids who drink this beverage
regularly taller, stronger, and sharper. It further asserts that regular consumption of Healthybody combined
with a healthy diet as well as a healthy lifestyle can lead to quantifiable enhancement in the growth and
development of the child along with better concentration power. Swasth, on the other hand, is a powdered
milk energy drink which is again preferred in many Indian households. It is a brand owned Body Wellness
Products Limited. In mid-2020 Swasth aired an advertisement and declared that one cup of Swasth was
equivalent to two cups of Healthybody, thus providing the same amount of protein in one cup of Swasth
that Healthybody furnished in two cups. A suit was filed in the Mumbai District Consumer Redressal Forum
and plaintiff mentioned in their plaint that the said TVC generated incertitude and perplexity in the minds
of the customers by giving a fallacious implication to them regarding their product thereby amounting to
undue influence upon the minds of the consumers. Plaintiffs have filed the present suit against the defendant
inter alia seeking prayer of permanent injunction and restraining the defendant, its Directors, Partners,
agents etc. from telecasting or otherwise communicating to the public the impugned advertisement which
amounts to intentional and deliberate disparagement of the plaintiffs‟ health food drink HealthyBody by
the defendant through its television commercial (TVC).
20

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
ARGUMENTS:
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
 Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens the right to freedom of
speech and expression. The law states that, <all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech
and expression=. Under Article 19(2) <reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the exercise of this
right for certain purposes. Any limitation on the exercise of the right under Article 19(1)(a) not
falling within the four corners of Article 19(2) cannot be valid.
 The freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) includes the right to express one9s views and opinions
at any issue through any medium, e.g. by words of mouth, writing, printing, picture, film, movie
etc. It thus includes the freedom of communication and the right to propagate or publish opinion.
But this right is subject to reasonable restrictions being imposed under Article 19(2). Free
expression cannot be equated or confused with a license to make unfounded and irresponsible
allegations against the judiciary.
 It is important to note that a restriction on the freedom of speech of any citizen may be placed as
much by an action of the State as by its inaction. Thus, failure on the part of the State to guarantee
to all its citizens irrespective of their circumstances and the class to which they belong, the
fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression would constitute a violation of Article
19(1)(a).
 The fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression is regarded as one of the most basic
elements of a healthy democracy for it allows its citizens to participate fully and effectively in the
social and political process of the country. In fact, the freedom of speech and expression gives
greater scope and meaning to the citizenship of a person extending the concept from the level of
basic existence to giving the person a political and social life.
 This right is available only to a citizen of India and not to foreign nationals. This right is, however,
not absolute and it allows Government to frame laws to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest
of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states,
public order, decency and morality and contempt of court, defamation and incitement to an offence.
 In the Preamble to the Constitution of India, the people of India declared their solemn resolve to
secure to all its citizen liberty of thought and expression. The Constitution affirms the right to
freedom of expression, which includes the right to voice one9s opinion, the right to seek information
and ideas, the right to receive information and the right to impart information. The Indian State is
under an obligation to create conditions in which all the citizens can effectively and efficiently enjoy
the aforesaid rights.
21

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Section 3 of the Food Safety and standards packaging and labelling Regulations, 2011
Section 3 of the above act, states all definitions under the said Act.
Section 3(b) defines Advertisement as follows:
"Advertisement" means any audio or visual publicity, representation or pronouncement made by means of
any light, sound, smoke, gas, print, electronic media, internet or website and includes through any notice,
circular, label, wrapper, invoice or other documents.
Argument in relation to False Advertisement:
HealthyBody the Plaintiff is renowned corporations and is one of the key brands in the health food drinks
department, it has a variety of food drinks available. It is a brand owned by Healthy Products Ltd.
The Food drink Healthy Body is sold in many countries around the world in different formulation in order
to cater the needs of the varying consumers and its drink Healthybody is seen as a complete health drink
amongst the consumers. It claims to have been clinically proven to make kids who drink this beverage
regularly taller, stronger, and sharper.
It further asserts that regular consumption of Healthybody combined with a healthy diet as well as a healthy
lifestyle can lead to quantifiable enhancement in the growth and development of the child along with better
concentration power. It is packed with 23 essential nutrients, it has carefully selected the ingredients for the
overall growth and development of the child9s body and mind and it has been proven that supplementation
of the child9s nutrient with HealthyBody improves micronutrient status and promotes physical and mental
development in children.
In the Mid of 2020 a competing brand named Swasth owned by Body wellness Products Ltd released a
TVC/Advertisement stating that one cup of Swasth was equivalent to two cups of Healthybody, thus
providing the same amount of protein in one cup of Swasth that Healthybody furnished in two cups.
The Plaintiff complained that the said TVC generated incertitude and perplexity in the minds of the
customers by giving a fallacious implication to them regarding their product thereby amounting to undue
influence upon the minds of the consumers, it mislead the consumers of their product. The Plaintiff has
complained that the opposing party communicated to the public the impugned advertisement which
amounts to intentional and deliberate disparagement of the drink HealthyBody.
22

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
The Plaintiff stated that as per Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India gives the right to freedom of
speech and expression subject to certain restrictions as per Article 19(2).
The plaintiff stated that an advertisement is commercial speech and is protected by Article 19(1)(a) of the
Constitution. However such an advertisement must not be false, misleading, unfair or deceptive. It should
not be misleading to the consumers at large. It must not destroy the integrity of the brand.
The Plaintiff thus seeks of permanent injunction and restraining the defendant, its Directors, Partners,
agents etc. from telecasting such a misleading TVC and causing deliberate disparagement.
23

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Cited Case Laws:
Horlicks Limited & Anr. vs Zydus Wellness Products Limited on 14 May, 2020:
Horlicks is one of the key brands in the health food drinks variety available in India. It is a brand owned by
the Hindustan Unilever Limited who acquired it from the GSK Consumer Healthcare in the year 2020. It
claims to have been clinically proven to make kids who drink this beverage regularly taller, stronger, and
sharper. It further asserts that regular consumption of Horlicks combined with a healthy diet as well as a
healthy lifestyle can lead to quantifiable enhancement in the growth and development of the child along
with better concentration power. Complan, on the other hand, is a powdered milk energy drink which is
again preferred in many Indian households. It is a brand owned by Zydus Wellness Products Limited.
In mid-2019, Complan (owned by Zydus) aired an advertisement and declared that one cup of Complan
was equivalent to two cups of Horlicks (owned by Unilever) thus providing the same amount of protein in
one cup of Complan that Horlicks furnished in two cups. A suit was filed in the Delhi High Court by
Horlicks seeking a permanent injunction prohibiting Zydus Wellness Products from airing the disputed
TVC.
What the plaintiffs contended?
Horlicks (the plaintiff) mentioned in their plaint that the said TVC generated incertitude and perplexity in
the minds of the customers by giving a fallacious implication to them. The TVC also did not furnish any
voiceover for the disclaimer and the advertisement was way short for the customer to scrutinize the textual
disclaimer. The plaintiff contended that the purpose of the TVC was to disparage and belittle their product.
What the defendants contended?
The Zydus Company (the defendants) stated that the gross motive of the said TVC was to edify the
viewers/consumers about the protein content that one cup of Complan contained which was equivalent to
the protein content that Horlicks (the plaintiff) contained in two cups. The defendant further contended that
they should be given the liberty to be creative latitude to which the plaintiff should not act as hypersensitive.
It further stated that per size cup comparison was a recognized approach of comparison. A comprehensive
evaluation of the facts along with the ramifications of the TVC should be considered. Henceforth, the Court
of law should not impede and obstruct in the grossest case of abuse.
Decision of the Delhi high court:
24

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
The Delhi High Court highlighted the category of the channel that was used to disseminate the
advertisement in this case. The Court marked that any advertisement aired through an electronic form of
media would lead to creating well-fortified repercussions on the customers than if it was given out on print
media. The Court was of the opinion that a viewer or a customer who sees any advertisement of such a
small duration cannot be expected to read any sort of textual disclaimer given anywhere on the screen.
Justice Mukta Gupta, the presiding Judge over the case, said that under such circumstances, any viewer
viewing the commercial would be deceived and Horlicks (the plaintiff) would have to suffer an
irredeemable loss. Thus, the High Court restrained the Zydus Company from airing its commercial in the
current form till the time the lawsuit that was initially filed by Horlicks wasn9t disposed of.
Observations:
This particular Order significantly differentiated between the gradations of advertisements published in
print media in contrast to electronic media. It exhibited that an uncongealed viewpoint was a prerequisite
in determining similar content of advertisements when manifested in divergent categories of media. This
judgment also provides a basis on which courts and companies/manufacturers can bank on while deciding
and programming advertisements discretely.
Negative impacts of misleading advertisements:
Misleading advertisements have far-reaching repercussions on the customers, their business and employees,
and on the perception of competition. These false advertisements might lead to the customer being
misinformed about a product or service and making wrong decisions. It leads to the customer wasting their
hard-earned money on the wrong product or service and being completely unsatisfied along with creating
havoc for them. These misleading advertisements often harm their business as well as employees too. If a
consumer is unhappy with the products or services of them, they bad mouth it, and negative stories about
the same start cooking up eventually damaging the reputation of the company permanently. These often
attract severe legal actions against them.
The employees of such companies work in the frontline and often get blamed for the duped services despite
the fact that they neither created nor endorsed the brands. They are often blamed for the faulty product or
service. This often leads to demotivation developing amongst the employees further leading to the losses
of the company. It is because of the competition that every brand tries to bring new and modern changes in
their products and services. However, if a single company indulges in a misleading advertisement, it might
lead the other companies dealing with similar products to invest in the same resulting in industry-wide
damage.
25

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Conclusion:
The law in regard to the misleading advertisements is rapidly changing. It may be fascinating to observe
that the Delhi High Court had earlier permitted the circulation of a similar kind of advertisement (Horlicks
Ltd. & Anr. v. Heinz India Pvt. Ltd.) in the form of print media but inhibited the same when telecasted in
the form of electronic media. This happened because advertisement through electronic media is supposed
to create a deeper impact on the audience than through print media. Electronic media involves a merger of
both audio and visual display which more presumably impacts the audience and which is why it needs
precise regulations.
26

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Havells India Ltd & Anr vs Amritanshu Khaitan & Ors on 17 March, 2015
Brief Facts:
Defendants released an advertisement. In the said advertisement, the Defendant compared Eveready LED
Bulb with Havells LED Bulb. Plaintiffs filed a Suit for Disparagement against the Plaintiff. Along with the
suit, the Plaintiffs also filed an application for interim relief. The present decision is on that application.
Plaintiffs’ Contentions:
The Statement that <check lumens and price before you buy= was an invitation to consumers to compare
only two attributes of a bulb, i.e. lumens and price as if they were the only relevant for determining value
of an LED Bulb. This comparison is selective and mischievous. Defendant was obliged to compare all
relevant parameters. When it came to superiority in lumens, advertisement makes a comparison not just
with Plaintiffs9 product but also with other third party products, but when it came to power factor, the
Defendants shifted the comparison to one between its product (LED Bulb) and CFL Bulb instead of rival
LED Bulbs. Defendants, by only highlighting two of the four features, attempted to leap frog over the
plaintiffs‟ product by optimising only two of the four attributes and giving an impression that only two of
its superior attributes are the relevant attributes.
Defendants’ Contentions:
Representations made in the impugned advertisement were true and justified. Comparative representations
made in the impugned advertisement were derived from the product packaging of all companies mentioned
in the said advertisement. Comparison of the rival products of lumens per watt, lumens and price was
justified as the packaging of all the rival products did not contain all the parameters suggested by the
Plaintiffs. The common features in all packaging had been mentioned in the comparative table mentioned
in the advertisement. Therefore, not only was the representation made in the impugned advertisement true
but the same was also justified. <Lumens= is a measure of total amount of visible light emitted by a light
source. Therefore, the defendant No.2 was completely justified in making the representation of brightness
on the basis of lumens. Glorifying one9s product was permissible provided the rival9s product was not
denigrated. No case of special damage had been set up by the plaintiffs. He submitted that in order to
maintain an action for disparagement, the plaintiffs would not only have to plead, but also prove a case of
special damage caused as a result of the offending publication/representation.
27

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Court’s reasoning:
Advertisements are not to be read as testamentary provisions in a will following Mc Donalds Hamburgers
Ltd. v. Burgerking (UK) Ld.[1987] FSR 112 (Para 24). Public expects a certain hyperbole in advertising.
Comparative advertising can be resorted to only with regard to like products. Comparative advertising is
permitted when the following conditions are met:
 goods or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose,
 one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features, and
 Products with the same designation of origin.
In India law, there is no rule which requires all the features of a product have to be necessarily compared
in an advertisement. In Comparative Advertising, a certain amount of disparagement is implicit following
Colgate Palmolive Company & Anr. v. Hindustan Unilever Ltd., 2014 (57) PTC 47 [Del][DB] (Para 36)
Competitors can compare but cannot mislead. For an advertisement to be misleading, the same must have
potential to deceive and must be likely to affect the economic behaviour of the public to whom it is
addressed. There is no bar in comparing CFL and LED bulbs.
Lumens are a measure of brightness and one of the essential functions of a bulb is to dispel darkness. It is
open to an advertiser to highlight a special feature/characteristic of his product which sets it apart from its
competitors and to make a comparison as long as it is true. In other words, it is open to an advertiser to
objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative feature of the goods and
services in question which may include price. There is no requirement in law to disclose each and every
factor/characteristic in comparative advertisement. Impugned advertising campaign is not misleading and
there is no denigration or disparagement of plaintiff9s mark. Further, the factors compared are material,
relevant, verifiable and representative features.
28

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PRAYER:
A. Declare that in case of any evidence having been supressed be found out for the purpose of justice.
B. Also, pass any other relief that the Hon9ble Court may be pleased to grant in favour of the petitioner in
the interest of justice, equity and good conscience, all of which is respectfully submitted. And for this
act of kindness the petitioners as are duty bound shall ever pray.
29

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
SUBMISSION ON MOOT COURT CASE III

CONSTITUTIONAL CASE:
30

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
AYUB KHAN AND UNION OF INDIA

OTHERS
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT:
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
ARGUMENTS……….………………………………………………………………….VI
PRAYER…………………..…………………………………………………………..VII
31

lOMoARcPSD|31060264

1 Arjun Gopal vs Union Of India . on 23 October, 2018 40-41
2 M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 March, 2004 42-44
The Petitioner has approached the Hon9ble Trial Court of Maharashtra, under Section 3(3) of the
Environment Protection Act, 1986 and Article 19(1)(g), Article 21 and Article 25 of the Constitution of
India, 1949.
The present memorial on behalf of the respondent sets forth the facts, contentions and arguments in
the present case
32

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution allows a citizen to practice any profession, or to carry on any
occupation, trade or business.
However, this is not absolute, and it is subject to a reasonable restriction one such reasonable restriction is
Environmental Protection. That means the tight to trade can be restricted if it adversely effects the
environment. The judicial trend in India is always of balancing right to trade and Environment Protection.
Article 21 of Constitution of India: Protection of Life and Personal Liberty
Article 21 states that <No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to a
procedure established by law.= Thus, article 21 secures two rights:
 Right to life, and
 Right to personal liberty
Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion to all persons in India. It provides that all
persons in India, subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions:
 Are equally entitled to freedom of conscience, and

 Have the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.
It further provides that this article shall not affect any existing law and shall not prevent the state from
making any law relating to:
 Regulation or restriction of any economic, financial, political, or any secular activity associated with
religious practice.
 Providing social welfare and reform.
 Opening of Hindu religious institutions of public character for all the classes and sections of the
Hindus.
Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 <shall implement the 8precautionary principle9 and
the 8polluter-pays principle9=.
33

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Background:
 The Writ petition was filed by 3 petitioner namely Petitioner No. 1 Ayub Khan and Petitioner No. 2
Gopal Sharma, on the date of filing of this writ petition, were six months old and Petitioner No. 3
Anil Yadav was fourteen months old.
 This petition has been filed through their next friends, their fathers, who are concerned about the
health of their children as they feel that due to the alarming degradation of the air quality, leading
to severe air pollution in the city of Sundar Nagar (where these Petitioners reside), the Petitioners
may encounter various health hazards.
 Poor, very poor or severe air quality/air pollution affects all citizens, irrespective of their age.
 However, the Petitioners claim that, children especially infants are much more vulnerable to air
pollutants as exposure thereto may affect them in various ways, including aggravation of asthma,
coughing, bronchitis, retarded nervous system breakdown and even cognitive impairment.
 The petition accepts that there are number of reasons which have contributed to poor air quality in
Sundar Nagar a city in Sindhia country.
 At the same time, it is emphasized that air pollution hits its all-time high during Diwali time because
of indiscriminate use of firecrackers, the chemical composition whereof increases harmful
particulate matters at an alarming level.
 Petitioners approached the Supreme Court for seeking relief as pollution creates violation of right
to health, violation of provisions of different laws and well established principles.
 Petitioner thus wants the court to issue appropriate directions in order to control the rising level of
environment pollution problem which affects the life of people which is the basic fundamental right
guaranteed under Constitution.
34

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Issue 1:
Whether the fundamental right to wholesome health and environment of the petitioner enshrined under
Article 21 has been violated or not?
Issue 2:
Whether the fundamental right to carry out business, trade, or occupation enshrined under Article 19(1)(g)
of the Indian Constitution would be violated or not, if ban is imposed on fire cracker?
Issue 3:
Whether a total/complete ban on fire crackers is justified or not?
35

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
The petitioner have approached the court seeking relief in relation to extreme air pollution in Sundar Nagar
The petitioner has sought wide ranging reliefs against the use of firewroks. The primary contention of the
petitioners is that the use of fireworks in Sundar Nagar has posed a serious problem to the inhability of air
during Diwali season. According to the petitioners the problem has reached proportions that are intolerable
and are causing immense harm to the peace, wellbeing causing immense harm to the peace, well-being and
health both physical and mental. In fairness, we must say that there was no serious opposition to the impact
of fireworks on the ambient air and the unhealthy effects of fireworks on it. The opposition was mainly
about the total banning of fireworks in all circumstances.
It has been brought to our notice that the severe air pollution in the Sunder Nagar is leading to multiple
diseases and other health related issues amongst the people. It is said that the increase in respiratory diseases
like asthma, lung cancer, bronchitis etc. is primarily attributable to the worsening air quality in the Sundar
Nagar. The damage being caused to peoples lungs is said to be irreversible. Other health related issues like
allergies, temporary deafness are also on the rise. Various experts have pointed towards multiple adverse
effects of air pollution on human health like premature deaths, rise in mortality rates, palpitation, loss of
vision, arthritis, heart ailments, cancer, etc.
We state that when we refer to these extreme effects, we are not merely referring to the inconvenience
caused to people, but to abject deprivation of a range of constitutionally embedded rights that the residents
of Sundar Nagar ought to have enjoyed. Needless to state, the grim situation of air quality adversely affected
the right to education, work, health and ultimately, the right to life of the citizens, and this Court is
constitutionally bound to address their grave concerns.
It is however certain that, now, when the Air Quality Index in Sundar Nagar is abysmally and threateningly
severe, allowing free trade in fireworks which is a major source of noise and air pollution and is causing
immense harm to the lives and health of citizens, and allowing availability of such fireworks or explosives
constitutes a serious invasion of the Freedoms and Rights conferred on citizens by Part III of the
Constitution of India. Such an invasion is all the more deleterious towards the rights and freedom of the
poor and the underprivileged who must breathe such air without any means of protecting themselves.
36

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
ARGUMENTS:
The petitioner filed a writ petition with regards to the safety of the People and the children, due to the poor
air quality in Sundar Nagar.
The petitioner has pleaded a total ban on the usage of fireworks due to the worsening air quality.
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking emergent reliefs in relation to the extreme air pollution.
The petitioner has sought wide ranging reliefs against the use of fireworks. The primary contention of the
petitioners is that the use of fireworks in the Sundar Nagar has posed a serious problem to the inhability of
the air during Diwali and the wedding season. According to the petitioners, the problem has reached
proportions in the Sundar Nagar which are not tolerable and are causing immense harm to the peace, well-
being and health both physical and mental. In fairness, we must say that there was no serious opposition to
the impact of fireworks on the ambient air and the unhealthy effects of fireworks on it. The opposition was
mainly about the total banning of fireworks in all circumstances.
On account of the above we state that,
In India, air quality standards are measured in terms of the Air Quality Index, which was launched by the
Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Reports indicate that the AQI in Sundar Nagar was much above the severe standard, shooting off the AQI
500 mark on many days this November. On the day after Diwali, it was more than 14 times the safe limits
The hazardous levels of air pollution in the last few weeks has spared very few from its ill effects. The life
of the citizens of Sundar Nagar was brought to a virtual standstill, not to speak about the plight of the
thousands of mute flora and fauna. Schools were declared shut, denizens of the city advised to stay indoors,
construction activities stopped, power stations shut and ban imposed on burning of garbage and agricultural
waste. The fall in air quality has had a significant impact on people9s lifestyle as well. The rising costs to
protect against air pollution are substantial. It has come to our notice that people are queuing up to purchase
protective masks and air purification systems in the wake of dense smog all over the Sundar Nagar. In short,
the capital was smogged into an environmental emergency of unseen proportion.
The adverse effects of these extreme levels of air pollution spare no one- the young, the old, the infirm and
even the future generations.
It has been brought to our notice that the severe air pollution in the Sundar Nagar is leading to multiple
diseases and other health related issues amongst the people. It is said that the increase in respiratory diseases
37

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
like asthma, lung cancer, bronchitis etc. is primarily attributable to the worsening air quality in the Sundar
Nagar. The damage being caused to peoples lungs is said to be irreversible. Other health related issues like
allergies, temporary deafness are also on the rise. Various experts have pointed towards multiple adverse
effects of air pollution on human health like premature deaths, rise in mortality rates, palpitation, loss of
vision, arthritis, heart ailments, cancer, etc.
When we refer to these extreme effects, we are not merely referring to the inconvenience caused to people,
but to abject deprivation of a range of constitutionally embedded rights that the residents of Sundar Nagar
ought to have enjoyed. Needless to state, the grim situation of air quality adversely affected the right to
education, work, health and ultimately, the right to life of the citizens, and this Court is constitutionally
bound to address their grave concerns.
The latest report (by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) on the ambient air quality during the
Diwali period shows that air pollution has reached record levels and has become intolerable. We find that
the air quality in Sundar Nagar is mostly poor as per the standards prescribed by the Government of India,
but it becomes much worse during Diwali.
Grievance was made before us about the thousands, even a lakh of crackers on one string going off at night;
and several such strings going off in the neighbourhood, totally unmindful of the aged, the tender and the
ill. All this firework, even that which is not noisy, leaves the ambient air thick with noxious particles.
Marriage processions, barats, passing through an area generated the same kind of noise and leave behind
the same kind of air, by the use of fire crackers. It is not necessary to speculate if those who suffer send
their good wishes for the event, or to those `celebrating Diwali in this way.
We are conscious that we are dealing with time honoured ways of celebrating certain occasions. The
petitioners and every member of the Bench and the Bar also celebrate in the same way. But does that justify
the continuance of this manner of celebration, when the quality of air in the region is so poor and injurious
to health and well-being and is destroying essential components of the freedom to live a healthy life? In
any case till the quality of air improves we do not pronounce finally on this question at this stage
It is however certain that, now, when the Air Quality Index in the Sundar Nagar is abysmally and
threateningly severe, allowing free trade in fireworks which is a major source of noise and air pollution and
is causing immense harm to the lives and health of citizens, and allowing availability of such fireworks or
explosives constitutes a serious invasion of the Freedoms and Rights conferred on citizens by Part III of the
Constitution of India. Such an invasion is all the more deleterious towards the rights and freedom of the
poor and the underprivileged who must breathe such air without any means of protecting themselves.
38

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
There is no doubt that protecting citizens (including those who use fireworks) by making these unavailable
in the market would require the suspension of trade of a miniscule section of the population. Maybe they
have acquired stocks for sale or obtained credit for their business. We are however of the view, that
balancing the vital interests of the vast majority of citizens against the commercial interests of a few, the
balance must heavily tilt in favour of citizens in general.
We are aware that we are only issuing interim directions, and much is left to be heard, discussed and said
about the rival claims and contentions. . What is however indisputable is that the harmful effects of
fireworks on the ambient air and the lungs, eyes and ears of people. What is also obvious is the extreme
nuisance, noise the fireworks cause to citizens particularly the ailing and the aged. Therefore, though much
can be argued as always about the significance and even joy of bursting fireworks. But at the same, prima
facie, a just constitutional balance, must overwhelmingly prioritize the harmful effects of this hazardous air
on present and future generations, irreversible and imperceptible as they are, over the immediate
commercial constraints of the manufacturers and suppliers of fireworks.
We thus consider it inappropriate that explosives which are used as fireworks should be available in the
market in the NCR till further orders.
We direct the Central Government to:
 Suspend all such licenses as permit sale of fireworks, wholesale and retail within the territory of
NCR.
 The suspension shall remain in force till further orders of this Court.
 No such licenses shall be granted or renewed till further orders.
39

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Cited Case Laws:
Arjun Gopal V Union of India on 23 October, 2018
Brief Facts:
 The present writ petition was filed by the fathers of three infants because they were concerned about
their health. According to them there is severe air pollution in the city of Delhi which has various
health hazards like aggravation of asthma, coughing, bronchitis, retarded nervous system
breakdown, cognitive impairment etc. It was accepted that there are various causes of pollution but
the indiscriminate use of firecrackers during the time of Diwali was the main reason for the
degradation of the air quality during that time.
 The petitioners have, thus, prayed for issuing directions to the respondents for taking steps to strike
at the causes of pollution and for banning the use of firecrackers in any form, during festivals or
otherwise.
 This petition was taken up along with certain other connected petitions and interlocutory
applications and interim orders dated November 16, 2016 were passed with a view to curb the air
pollution in Delhi and NCR. The Court while issuing the interim orders exercised the powers given
by Rule 118 of the Explosive Rules, 2008, framed under the Explosives Act, 1884, and suspended
the licenses of sale of fireworks, wholesale and retail within the territory of NCR till any further
order of this court and also stated that no such licenses shall be granted or renewed till further orders.
 Later on the manufacturers of firecrackers as well as license holders filed applications for
modification of the aforesaid interim order. By order dated September 12, 2017 the court removed
the absolute ban on the sale of firecrackers and lifted the suspension of the permanent licenses for
sale of the crackers as it was noticed that bursting of crackers during Diwali was not the sole cause
of increasing the pollution during that time.
 After the aforesaid order was passed, many applications were filed, from both sides, seeking
modification of some of the aforesaid directions. The petitioners prayed for the restoration of the
order dated November 11, 2016 whereas the fireworks manufacturers, traders and license holders
of the fireworks/firecrackers wanted that relaxation given in the order dated September 12, 2017 be
further liberalized
Issue before the Court:
40

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 Whether there must be a complete ban on the display of fireworks during Diwali or it can be
regulated in a manner which may not result into air pollution or may be least intrusive?
 Whether the fundamental right of businessmen & traders under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 25
violated by ban of firecrackers and whether such rights supersede the fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution ?
Decision held by the Court:
In this case the judgement was given by JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI that it was held that for the time being the
above suggestions shall be accepted as they help in achieving a good balance between the two competing
interests and at the same time provides reasonable solutions for the above-mentioned problems. All the
interlocutory applications seeking intervention, directions, modification, etc. were disposed of and the writ
petitions were listed on December 11, 2018.
 Dealing with the issue of loss of revenue and unemployment due to such ban, court gave no
conclusive determination with regard to such arguments because of lack of detailed studies on
various aspects.
 Court further held that Article 25 is subject to Article 21 of Constitution so Article 21 would be
given preference over Article 19(1)(g) and Article 25 in the instant case.
 All the interlocutory applications seeking impleadment, intervention, directions, modification, etc.
are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
41

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 March, 2004
Facts of the Case:
A writ petition was filed by M.C Mehta, a social activist lawyer, he sought closure for Shriram Industries
as it was engaged in manufacturing of hazardous substances and located in a densely populated area of Kirti
Nagar.While the petition was pending, on 4 and 6 December 1985, there was leakage of oleum gas from
one of its units which caused the death of an advocate and affected the health of several others. The incident
took place on December 4, 1985.
Just after one year from the Bhopal gas disaster a large number of persons – both amongst the workmen
and public were affected. This incident also reminded of the Bhopal gas holocaust.
M.C Mehta filed a PIL under Articles 21 and 32 of the Constitution and sought closure and relocation of
the Shriram Caustic Chlorine and Sulphuric Acid Plant which was located in a thickly populated area of
Delhi.
Factories were closed down immediately as Inspector of Factories and Commissioner (Factories) issued
separate orders dated December 8 and 24, 1985. This incident took place only a few months before
Environment (Protection) Act came into force, thus became a guiding force for having an effective law like
this.
There are six reported orders in the Shriram Food and Fertilizer Industry case of the Supreme Court of
India, out of these six, four orders were pronounced before Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 was passed
and the date from which it came into force. Thus the reported orders are relevant and important as they shed
new light on how highly toxic and hazardous substances industry should be dealt with and contained and
controlled to minimize hazards to the workers and general public.
Issues:
1. Whether such hazardous industries to be allowed to operate in such areas

2. If they are allowed to work in such areas, whether any regulating mechanism be evolved.
3. Liability and amount of compensation how to be determined.
Decision:
Chief Justice Bhagwati showed his deep concern for the safety of the people of the Delhi from the leakage
of hazardous substances like the one here – oleum gas. He was of the opinion that we cannot adopt the
policy to do away with chemical or hazardous industries as they also help to improve the quality of life, a
42

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
sin this case this factory, was supplying chlorine to Delhi Water Supply Undertaking which is used to
maintain the wholesomeness of drinking water. Thus industries even if hazardous have to be set up since
they are essential for economic development and advancement of well being of the people.
"We can only hope to reduce the element of hazard or risk to the community by taking all necessary steps
for locating such industries in a matter which would pose least risk of danger to the community and
maximizing safety requirements in such industries "
Thus the Supreme Court was of the opinion that total ban on the above industry of public utility will impede
the developmental activities.
It was also observed that permanent closure of the factory would result in the unemployment of 4000
workers, caustic soda factory and add to social problem of poverty. Therefore the court made an order to
open the factory temporarily subject to eleven conditions and appointed an expert committee to monitor the
working of the industry.
The court also suggested that a national policy will have to be evolved by the Government for the location
of toxic or hazardous industries and a decision will have to be taken in regard of relocation of such industries
with a view to eliminate risk to the community.
Some of the conditions formulated by the government were -:
1. The Central Pollution Control Board to appoint an inspector to inspect and see that pollution
standards set under the Water Act and Air Act to be followed.
2. To constitute Worker's Safety Committee
3. Industry to publicise the effects of chlorine and its appropriate treatment
4. Instruct and train its workers in plant safety through audio visual programme, install loudspeaker to
alert neighbors in the event of leakage of gas
5. Workers to use safety devices like masks and belts
6. And that the workers of Shriram to furnish undertaking from Chairman of DCM Limited, that in
case of escape of gas resulting in death or injury to workmen or people living in vicinity they will
be "personally responsible " for payment of compensation of such death or injury .
The Court also directed that Shriram industries would deposit Rs 20 lakhs and to furnish a bank guarantee
for Rs. 15 lakhs for payment of compensation claims of the victims of oleum gas if there was any escape
of chlorine gas within three years from the date of order resulting in death or injury to any workmen or
living public in the vicinity . The quantum of compensation was determinable by the District Judge , Delhi
43

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
.It also shows that the court made the industry "absolutely liable " and compensation to be paid as when the
injury was proved without requiring the industry to be present in the case .
The above mentioned conditions were formulated to ensure continuous compliance with the safety
standards and procedures laid by the committees (Manmohan Singh Committee and Nilay Choudhary
Committee ) so that the possibility of hazard or risk to workmen could be reduced to nil .
This all indicates that Supreme Court in its judgement emphasized that certain standard qualities to be laid
down by the government and further it should also make law on the management and handling of hazardous
substances including the procedure to set up and to run industry with minimal risk to humans , animals etc.
Further the industries cannot absolve itself of the responsibility by showing either that that they were not
negligent in dealing with the hazardous substance or they took all the necessary and reasonable precautions
while dealing with it. Thus the court applied the principle of no – fault liability in this case
44

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PRAYER
A. Declare that, a judge who has expressed opinion as part of the referring bench, ought not to participate
in the larger bench hearing the referred case.
B. Declare that, it is outside the purview of this Court to lay down any guidelines in this regard.
C. Declare that, the fees of lawyers must not be regulated as prayed by the Petitioner.
D. Also, pass any other relief that the Hon9ble Court may be pleased to grant in favour of the Respondent
in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience, all of which is respectfully submitted.
And for this act of kindness the respondents as are duty bound shall ever pray.
45

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PART II
CASE COMMENT 1:
CIVIL CASE
46

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Maneka Gandhi Vs Union of India (AIR 1978 SC 597)
Introduction:
This case summary attempts to analyse the judgement of the Supreme Court in the historical decision
of Maneka Gandhi v Union of India reported in AIR 1978 SC 597 which expanded the scope of Article 21
of the Constitution and changed the face of Indian politics and law.
Delivered by a 7-judge bench of the Hon9ble Supreme Court on 25th January 1978, this decision, marked
the development of a new era with respect to the interpretation of fundamental rights guaranteed in the
Constitution. This decision altered the very face of the Indian Constitution and marked a new era of
development in the concept of <personal liberty=. The decision stands as a beacon-light adding new
dimensions to the interpretation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.
Facts of the Case:
 Passport Act, 1967 empowers the authorities to impound the passport of certain individual if such
action is necessary in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India.
 The reasons of such impoundment are also to be communicated to the affected party, however in
the interests of the general public these reasons can be withheld.
 In the immediate case the authorities on July 4th 1977 issued a notice of impoundment of the
passport of Petitioner who was a known journalist citing reasons as in the interest of general public.
As soon as the petitioner got the notice of such impoundment, she reverted back to the authorities
asking for specific detailed reasons as to why her passport shall be impounded.
 The authorities however, answered that the reasons are not to be specified in the interest of the
general public.
 Therefore, the petitioner filed a writ petition under article 32 to the Supreme Court for enforcement
of Fundamental Right mentioned under article 14.
 The petition was further amended for the enforcement of Article 21 that is Protection of Life &
Personal Liberty, Article 19(1)(a) that is Right to freedom of speech & Article and 19(1)(g) that is
Right to freedom of Movement.
 Among the major reasons contended for the filing of such petition, the petitioner contended that the
impugned order is void as it took away the petitioner9s right to be given a fair hearing to present her
defence.
 This case directly brought into question the legality and validity of A.K. Gopalan v. State of
Madras. In that case it was argued by the petitioner that whether the validity of any law shall be
47

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
decided by the fact that it is a procedure established by law or the law along with being established
by law shall also conform to principles of natural justice.
 The majority bench however rejecting all the arguments of the petitioner held that the
word law under article 21 doesn9t necessarily be in conformity with the principles of natural justice.
 It was Justice Fazal Ali9s opinion in the case that paved the way for a liberal approach of the
interpretation of Art. 21. Justice Fazal Ali dissented with the majority by holding that the right to
life under article 21 does constitute Principles of Natural Justice and the courts should check that
any procedure established by law do not suffer with the problem of unreasonableness &
arbitrariness.
Issues of the Case:
 Is there any nexus between the provisions mentioned under Articles 14, 19 and 21.
 Scope of the word <Procedure Established by Law.=
 Whether right to travel abroad resides in Article 21.
 Whether a legislative law that takes away Right to life is reasonable.
Judgement of the case:
This landmark judgment came on 25th January 1978 and changed the landscape of the Constitution of India.
This judgment expanded the scope of Article 21 exponentially and this judgment truly & really made India
a welfare state as promised in the Preamble.
The major findings of the court were as follows:
 The court while delivering this landmark judgment changed the landscape of the Constitution by
holding that though the phrase used in Article 21 is <procedure established by law= instead of <due
process of law= however, the procedure must be free from arbitrariness and irrationality.
 Even though the Constitution makers must be respected, but they never intended to plant such a self
– destructive bomb in the heart if the Constitution. They were never of the mind that the procedure
need not necessarily be reasonable, just and fair. They drafted this Constitution for the protection
of the <people of India= and such interpretation of Article 21 will be counter-productive to the
protection offered by the Constitution.
48

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 The court overruled Gopalan by stating that there is a unique relationship between the provisions of
Article 14, 19 & 21 and every law must pass the tests of the said provisions. Earlier in Gopalan the
majority held that these provisions in itself are mutually exclusive. Therefore, to correct its earlier
mistake the court held that these provisions are not mutually exclusive and dependent on each other.
 The court held that the scope of <personal liberty= is not be construed in narrow and stricter sense.
The court said that personal liberty has to be understood in the broader and liberal sense. Therefore,
Article 21 was given an expansive interpretation. The court obligated the future courts to expand
the horizons of Article 21 to cover all the Fundamental Rights and avoid construing it in narrower
sense.
 The right to travel abroad as held in Satwant Singh is within the scope of guarantees mentioned
under Article 21.
 Section 10(3)(c) of Passport Act 1967 is not violative of neither Article 21 nor Article 19(1)(a) or
19 (1)(g). The court further held that the said 1967 provision also not in contradiction of Article 14.
Since the said provision provides for an opportunity to be heard. The court rejected the contention
of petitioner that the phrase <in the interests of the general public= is not vague.
 The court held that Section 10(3)(c) & 10(5) is an administrative order therefore, open to challenge
on the grounds of mala fide, unreasonable, denial of natural justice and ultra vires.
 The court also suggested government to ordinarily provide reasons in every case and should rarely
use the prerogative of Section 10(5) of the 1967 act.
 The rights discussed under 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(g) are not confined to the territorial limits of India.
Critical Analysis of the Case:
The court in commendable way overruled the regressive decision of Gopalan. The court by delivering this
judgment has served the common people. The court unanimously came harshly upon the contention of the
respondent when it contended that the procedure established by law need not necessarily be just, fair and
reasonable. The respondent9s argument that the law is valid as long as it is not repealed by the legislature.
The court rightly rejected this faulty argument of the respondent and gave the Right to Life and Personal
Liberty a new expansive and liberal interpretation.
The court held that though the phrase used in Article 21 is <procedure established by law= instead of <due
process of law= however, the procedure must be free from arbitrariness and irrationality. The court also
managed to respect and protect the sanctity of the Constitution makers by this black stain that the legislature
49

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
was trying to portray. The procedure established by law must satisfy certain requisites in the sense of being
reasonable and just and it cannot be arbitrary depriving the citizens the Fundamental rights.
The court also for once and for all rested the debate by holding that each Fundamental Rights are not distinct
from each other whereas they are mutually dependent on each other. In this regard Justice Iyer has very
well opined that no Article in the Constitution is an island in itself. Bhagwati j. held that the procedural law
has to meet the requirements of Articles 14 & 19 to be a valid law under Article 21.
Justice Iyer in the context of travelling abroad held that <Travel makes liberty worthwhile= therefore no
person can be deprived of his right to travel abroad.
The importance of Maneka Gandhi is limitless and the way the apex court grabbed the opportunity to
expand the horizons of Article 21 is commendable. The benefits that accrued to Indian citizens can be very
well understood by the aftermath of Maneka Gandhi when courts begin to insert every possible socio-
economic and cultural right in the scope of Article 21.
Conclusion:
The Maneka Gandhi judgment was a balanced judgment and is one of the best judgments that Indian
Supreme Court has ever given. The judgment9s greatest feature was the interlinking it established between
the provisions of Article 14, 19 & 21. By the virtue of this link the court made these provisions inseparable
and a single entity. Now any procedure to be valid has to meet all the requirements mentioned under Article
14, 19 & 21. Therefore, it expanded the scope of personal liberty exponentially and protected the
constitutional and fundamental right to life to a great extent.
50

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
CASE COMMENT 2:
CRIMINAL CASE
51

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Joseph Shine v. Union of India 2018 SC 1676

Introduction:
Adultery is an offence which make a man criminally liable who has sexual relations with a woman, who is
the wife of another man. And if the husband consents or connives to such an act it will no longer be adultery.
There is no right to a woman in case her husband commits adultery. In ancient history, adultery was
considered to be a sinful act either done by a married man or woman. Adultery in India does not treat a
woman as a culprit but as a victim who has been seduced by a man to do such an act. This law is violative
of our constitutional principles that is equality, non-discrimination, right to live with dignity and so on.
Adultery has been struck down as an offence in as many as 60 countries including South Korea, South
Africa, Uganda, Japan etc., on being gender discriminative and violating the right to privacy. Even Lord
Macaulay, the creator of the penal code objected its presence in the penal code as an offence rather
suggested that it should be better left as a civil wrong. The law evolves with the time and many recent
judgements have increased the ambit of fundamental rights in conformity with changing societal values and
increasing individual liberty. This judgement joins them in creating history by striking down 158 year-old
law which has lost its relevance with changing social and moral conditions.
Facts of the Case:
 A writ petition was filed under Article 32 by Joseph Shine who was the hotelier. He challenged the
constitutionality of Section 497 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 198 of Criminal Procedure
Code, being violative of Article 14, 15 and 21.
 The Core reason behind his petition was to shield Indian men from being punished for extra marital
relationships by vengeful women or their husbands.
 Petitioner's close friend in Kerala committed suicide after a women co-worker made malicious rape
charge on him.
 Further he stated that section 497 is an egregious occurrence of sexuality unfairness, authoritative
imperialism and male patriotism.
 This was at first a PIL filed against adultery. The petitioner claimed the provision for adultery to be
arbitrary and discriminatory on the basis of gender.
 The petitioner claimed that such a law demolishes the dignity of a woman. The constitutional bench
of 5 judges was set up to hear the petition
 The traditional framework in which section 497 was drafted, is no longer applicable in modern
society.
52

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Contentions of the Petitioner:
 The counsel for the petitioner contended that the provision criminalizes adultery on classification
based on sex alone which has no rational nexus to object to being achieved. The consent of the wife
is immaterial. Hence violative of Article 14 of the constitution.
 The petitioner contended that provision is based on the notion that a woman is property of the
husband. The provision says if the husband gives consent or connive then adultery is not committed.
 The provision for adultery is discriminative on the basis of gender as it provides only men with the
right to prosecute against adultery which is violative of Article 15.
 The petitioner contended that the provision is unconstitutional as it undermines the dignity of a
woman by not respecting her sexual autonomy and self-determination. It is violative of Article 21.
Section 497 of IPC read with Section 198 of CrPC must be struck down.
Contentions of the Respondent:
 The respondents contended that adultery is an offence which breaks the family relations and
deterrence should be there to protect the institution of marriage.
 The respondents claim that adultery affects the spouse, children and society as a whole. It is an
offence committed by an outsider with full knowledge to destroy the sanctity of marriage.
 The discrimination by the provision is saved by Article 15(3), which provides state right to make
special laws for women and children.
They request the court to delete the portion found unconstitutional but retain the provision.
Issues of the Case:
 Whether the provision for adultery is arbitrary and discriminatory under Article 14?
 Whether the provision for adultery encourages the stereotype of women being the property of men
and discriminates on gender basis under Article15?
 Whether the dignity of a woman is compromised by denial of her sexual autonomy and right to self-
determination?
 Whether criminalizing adultery is intrusion by law in the private realm of an individual?
53

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Judgement of the Case:
The judgment given by CJI, Deepak Mishra started with the statements proving that wives are not the
property of the husbands and husbands are not their masters.
Section 497 disposes off the women from her autonomy, dignity and privacy. The draftsmen of the
Constitution defined their vision of the society in which constitutional values would be attained by
emphasizing, among other freedoms, liberty and dignity. So fundamental is dignity that it permeates the
core of the rights guaranteed to the individual by Part III and Privacy of the individual is an essential aspect
of dignity.
Section 497 is considered as the wife's encroachment on her right to life and personal liberty by accepting
the notion of marriage which overthrows the true equality.
Equality is overthrown by adopting the sanctions of penal code to a gender-based approach to

the relationship of man and woman. Sexual autonomy falls within the area of personal liberty under Article
21 of Constitution of India. Trust and respect are two essentials of a marriage. When both the spouses
respect each other with equality and dignity then only the respect for sexual autonomy is established.
This section denies the substantive equality as it provides that women are not able to give her free consent
for the sexual acts in a legal order which considers them as a sexual property of their spouse. Therefore,
section 497 is violative of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution and it also violates the non-discrimination
clause of Article 15 of the Constitution of India. This section also lays strong emphasis on the consent of
the husband which leads to the subordination of women. Hence, it clearly violates Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.
Critical analysis:
Infidelity is more common in larger cities where people are moving towards westernization. This decision
has been widely criticized on the ground that it paved a way for people to commit adultery without any
fear. There has been an increase in adultery since its decriminalization. Males have claimed that now there
is no way to ensure the purity of bloodline. Many claims that recommendations from Law Commissions
should have been accepted by the parliament in order to punish men and women both equally for adultery.
The Supreme Court has also been criticized that they should have let parliament take decisions on adultery
according to the changing social environment.
54

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Conclusion:
This is the 21st century where equality and liberalism have taken over the world. There is a need for
legislative reforms to eliminate laws that are discriminatory against women. In India, many laws have
become redundant with the passage of time. Adultery being one of them, it was necessary to get rid of it.
Adultery not only discriminated between men and women but also demeans the dignity of a woman. This
was inserted as an offence when society was filled with patriarchy and paternalism. In that society, a
stereotype was created that women belong at home and they didn9t have equal rights and opportunity as
men did. And married women didn9t have an individual identity but were treated as the property of their
husband which is reflected in the provision for adultery.
But the times have changed; women are no longer behind the shadow of men. Adultery as a criminal offence
has no significance because it is a private matter in which courts should not interfere. There is sexual
autonomy to every individual and hindering the same would violate the constitutional principles. This
judgement decriminalizes the offence of adultery and makes it a ground for civil wrongs only. Criminalizing
both men and women as suggested by Law Commission reports would not have served the purpose as
adultery is an act which is an extremely private affair related to the matrimonial realm. The Legislature
should have taken this step long ago but nevertheless our judiciary has been very efficient in filling the gaps
and removing redundant laws with changing societal notions.
55

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
PART III
REPORT ON PRE-SESSION PREPARATION, CLIENT

INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES AND CHAMBER VISIT.
56

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Pre-session Preparation and Techniques of interviewing clients:

Building Block for a Client Session:
Interviewing:
Initial consultation between a prospective client and solicitors
Counselling:
Identify client9s alternative and priorities, help choosing constructive options.
Negotiation:
Implementation of goals set during counselling
Purpose of an Interview:
The purpose of interviews is to get and give information and decide what you are going to do with the
information you have got. It is also an opportunity to establish and maintain high standards of client care.
We cannot overstate the importance of first impressions that clients get from face-to-face meetings.
Although we are dealing principally with interviewing and advising clients, remember that you will also
have face-to-face meetings with other lawyers, other professionals, witnesses and other parties, where your
interviewing skills will play an important part. Whoever you are meeting, all your interviews will have a
similar underlying structure. When you interview clients, you will usually be aiming to
 help your client identify precisely what they want from the situation,
 gather information in order to identify ways in which the client9s aims can be achieved,
 help your client to reach decisions about the most appropriate way to get what they want, and
 create a feeling of confidence in your client as to your competence and commitment to their case.
Before the lawyer-client interview:
Conduct a thoughtful pre-screen and conflict check
An important part of an effective client intake process is to take steps to ensure that a potential client is a
good fit before moving forward. Not every legal issue will be a good fit for every advocate, it depends on
the practice area, workload, and firm size.
Pre-screen: Before booking the interview, have a set pre-screening process. Ask for basic information (for
example, via an intake questionnaire) to help you decide if the client may (or may not) be a fit. You can
make this process simpler for the client by using an online intake forms tool.
57

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Conflict check: Do a conflict check before proceeding to ensure there are no conflicts of interest or other
reasons that will prevent from working with someone. Here again, an online intake tool can make this easier
for you and the client.
Review the client’s file:
The initial client interview should be for asking questions, not for learning basic client details. Before the
interview, ask for any relevant information and documents so you can review them in advance.
Prepare, prepare, prepare: your questions and answers:
Once you9ve reviewed the client9s file, prepare the questions for the client, and take some time to anticipate
questions that the client may have for you. Goal is to have the client fill in blanks, reveal their goals and
expectations, and talk, about the case. Because of this, asking open-ended questions would encourage them
to share more details.
Send a confirmation email and a reminder:

Especially if time has been taken to thoroughly prepare for the interview, there9s nothing worse than a no-
show. While some no-shows are unavoidable, often a simple confirmation email and a reminder can ensure
the potential client makes it to the meeting. Be sure to include the appointment date and time and any other
pertinent information for the client9s convenience.
Preparing for a Client Interview:
At the bare minimum one would want to prepare for the following at least:
 To speak in private without our conversation being overheard by others in the room, passers-by,
people in an outer office, etc.
 Not to be interrupted by other people, telephones ringing etc.
 To have enough time to discuss the matter without others wanting that room, for example.
 To have the solicitor9s full attention.
 To sit in reasonable comfort.
 No physical barriers between us and our solicitor to impede communication.
 Not to be kept waiting.
The bare minimum, then, would appear to be a comfortable, quiet room where there won9t be any
disturbances for the duration of the interview and a room that enables us to be as formal or informal as the
client feels comfortable with.
58

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
In order to ensure that nothing is left out, using the WASP approach to planning, structuring and carrying
out the interview is effective. WASP is an acronym which breaks the interview into four parts. It stands for:
 Welcome,
 Acquire information,
 Supply information and advice,
 Part.
The legal sector is renowned for its competitiveness and gaining a training contract is tough. To impress
recruiters learn how to answer common law interview questions.
Just like in all job interviews, it pays to be prepared. Following example questions are great to be prepared.
Client Interview Goals:
 Get a sense of the client9s situation and legal questions/needs.

 Build Trust.
 Assess the client9s goals
 Assess the Client9s Credibility
 Be sensitive to the possible disabilities.
Seven stages of Interviewing the Client:
 Attending-Initiating-responding-Building Trust and Rapport with the Client.

 Listening process with empathy
 Facts gathering
 Setting and identifying the claim and legal problem
 Assessment of the claim
 Counselling the client about action to be taken
 Establishing Advocate-client relationship
59

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Report on the Chamber Visit:
<Consultation Fees Rs. 2000 for 10 Minutes=

On 18th of September 2021, the Students of K.C.Law College were given the opportunity to have virtual
chamber visit owing to the uncertain times.
Belong to Division B, on 18/09/2021 at 5:30 PM we are allowed a visit to Advocate Anoop Mehta9s
Chamber as a part of our practical learning.
Adv. Anoop Mehta showered upon us his endless knowledge and enlightened us with the practicalities of
the Profession we are about to enter.
Our college has been very generous in letting us experience an Advocate of Mr.Anoop Mehta9s Calibre for
our learning.
Advocate Anoop Mehta9s Chamber practice excels in Real Estate. His practice is Non-Litigative which
means he does ramp up for an argument in the court but rather does all the field work. His practice is
exclusively an Office Practice. He has been dealing with documents related to property, and has a glorified
experience of 42 years in the said field.
In the field of Property Law, the following activities need to be conducted by a lawyer:
 a lawyer needs to conduct due diligence pertaining to the tittle of property, including searches, hiring
search clerks and finding out whether the tittle to the property is defective or no.
 Prepare a Road Map of the transactions that are going to take place in the process of Sale of Property.
 Preparation of Document, whether to prepare an Agreement to Sale, where payment is deferred like
a loan transaction, or a Sale deed, where the payment is upfront.
He guided us on the realities of Legal consultation/Client Counselling. The awareness that good lawyers
have lost practice due to mishandling of the clients. A client in distress or in pain requires guidance or
counselling. Clients often complain that OUR LAWYERS DO NOT LISTEN TO US. It is important to
know to not only keep our ears open but also our eyes in order to develop an eye contact and create
relationships. It is crucial not to be casual or indifferent and develop a connection with the client.
Advocate further guided us on client meetings, making a client meeting methodical by making the client
go through the chronology will put the client at ease.
The following are the habits of an extraordinary lawyer:
 Good listening
 Allowing the client to speak
60

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
 Discipline
 Understanding
 Awareness of the Facts.
Sir, further stated that a lawyer9s advice is never free. The only commodities that we have are time and
knowledge.
As mentioned earlier Advocate Anoop Methta primarily practice in the chamber itself, Chamber visit has
two main parallels namely: Legal consultation and Drafting. Legal Consultation considering the new times
involves Online Practice and services, and drafting ensures proper receptive environment.
A lot of time the clients walk in with half bakes information, due to which tolerance in a lawyer becomes
essential. In today9s times a plethora of knowledge is available on google, which leads to misinformation.
This is common issue faced by a lot of doctors and lawyers.
It is thus the duty of the Lawyers to help the client bifurcate between the information. The client shall be
allowed to share everything that they know, the key is to be patient and to not argue with the client in such
situations.
Some questions asked during the Session were as follows:
 What is the Future of RERA rules wrt Practice?

Most advocates are looking for RERA specialisation, because it is a relatively new practice and a
Niche area, recently developed.
Delayed projects and false documents lead to consultancy and client development.
 How to professionally deal with <Najar Takun Gya=?

Basic Property Value these days is Rs. 1Cr, even then the clients try to save a few thousand rupees
of not paying to the lawyers, which puts Rs. 2 to 3 Cr at risk. This is not economically efficient.
Due to one error in the draft documents which could lead to falsification and penalties.
 How to deal with Corporate clients and their legal teams?

Corporate clients are very demanding and want everything <to be done yesterday=. They require the
communication to be very systematic via emails and conferences only. However corporate clients
mean long term relationship. In house lawyers of such big conglomerates feel inadequate as they
are not in SYNC with the actual realities. They have no ground Knowledge.
61

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
Corporate clients are good pay masters, if one falls in synchronicity with them. While they do
demand a lot of infrastructure, the profits are still huge.
 How should a lawyer deal with Baat Chit la Paisa Nai hot Saheb?
One needs to explain that there is no casual talk, this is the charge should we start?
Communication skill is the lawyers survival along with:
1. Body Language
2. Tone
3. Voice Modulation
4. Observation
5. Confidence
 How to solicit a new client for practice?

One cannot directly solicit a client, as one cannot speak below a certain level of dignity.
First clients come from friends. One should start out with free consultation. Nominal or no fees
needs to charged. Starting out one doesn9t have a road map and the situation is stressful. Once the
rhythm sets things work out.
 How to deal with the over crowdedness in the field?

He shed light on the fact that new generation of Lawyers are masters, their grasping, the talent is
absolutely fabulous and the competition, frightening. Amidst an environment like this it is necessary
to find your purpose, what you9re born for. Finding your groove, finding your passion, need to be
done early on.
All in all, Advocate Anoop Mehta gave us an insight on the hurdles we would face in the new future and
solutions to those hurdles. That each one is going to have a journey of its own, which would be the same
and yet so Different.
While riding on the High Horse one needs to remember where one comes from in order to stay in the
market, mint money, be successful and yet provide the best service that there is.
To conclude, a lawyer9s knowledge and experience is so monumental and precious, that catering to these
paves the way to becoming an excellent professional and combat the completion.
62

lOMoARcPSD|31060264
THANK YOU
- KASVI CHETAN THAKKAR
63

Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

lOMoARcPSD|31060264

Practical Training Kasvi Chetan Thakkar 111 B 9619589520

evidence law (Kishinchand Chellaram Law College)

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

PRACTICAL TRAINING JOURNAL

KASVI CHETAN THAKKAR

MOBILE NO: 9619589520

ROLL NO: <111=

PRACTICAL TRAINING III

K.C.LAW COLLEGE, MUMBAI

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

SR.NO PARTICULARS PAGE NO

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

SUBMISSION ON MOOT COURT CASE:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

BEFORE THE HONORABLE TRIAL COURT IN THE CASE OF:

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Sr.No Cases Page No.

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Whether there has been any suppression of Evidence by the Prosecution?

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Cited Case Law:

Facts of the Case:

Issues/ Facts of the Case:

Test of Grave and Sudden Provocation:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

The High Court Verdict:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

SUBMISSION ON MOOT COURT CASE II

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

BEFORE THE HONORABLE TRIAL COURT IN THE CASE OF:

HEALTHY BODY BODY WELLNESS

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Sr.No Cases Page No.

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

 It is a company incorporated in India and is a competitor of HealthyBody drink.

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Whether the opposite party9s advertisement/TVC attempts to mislead the consumer?

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Section 3(b) defines Advertisement as follows:

Argument in relation to False Advertisement:

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Downloaded by Vishal Kunvar ([email protected])

Cited Case Laws:

What the plaintiffs contended?

What the defendants contended?