हिंदी

Examine the Statement and Conclusions Given Below and Choose a Suitable Answer from the Options Given: Statements: 1. Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. Justice Hurried is Justice Buried. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Examine the Statement and Conclusions given below and choose a suitable answer from the options given:

Statements:

1. Justice delayed is justice denied. Justice hurried is justice buried.
2. More than 3 crore cases are pending in the Indian Courts.

Conclusions:

1. People are not getting justice in India.
2. Disposal of cases by ‘Fast track courts’ results in injustice.
3. Cases must be disposed of within a reasonable time.

विकल्प

  • Only Conclusion 1 follows.

  • Only Conclusion 2 follows.

  • Only Conclusion 3 follows.

  • No Conclusion follows.

MCQ

उत्तर

Only Conclusion 3 follows.

Explanation:

Justice delayed is justice denied. "Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. Justice Hurried Is Justice Buried The Law which rightly speaks about the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. The law is justice. Hence, the option 'Only Conclusion 3 follows.' is correct as conclusion 3 follows.

shaalaa.com
Important Court Decisions (Entrance Exams)
  क्या इस प्रश्न या उत्तर में कोई त्रुटि है?
2017-2018 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्न

An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court, court of appeals, appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort), which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts may follow varying rules from country to country. The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts with regard to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's decision on whether the action that has been appealed should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified. In the United States, both state and federal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were. Furthermore, US appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for the first time in the appeal. In most US states, and in US federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as a right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome. However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore, only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals. Some appellate courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power of discretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case.

Which of the following courts is authorized to initially determine the facts of the cases?


The age of retirement of a Judge of a High Court in India is 


Which authority in India notified the guidelines for the protection of persons assisting accident victims on Indian roads based on the Supreme Court's direction?


Examine the Statement and Conclusions given below and choose a suitable answer from the options given:

Statement: A punishment is the imposition of an undesirable or unpleasant outcome upon a group or individual, meted out by an authority.

Conclusions:

1. An eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is an example of punishment.
2. The imposition of a fine on someone who inflicted bodily injury on another is justified by the statement.


Mark the best option:
Consider the following statements:

  1. Fast Track Courts are being set up on the recommendation of the 12th Finance Commission.
  2. Fast Track Courts take up Sessions cases pending for two years or more and the cases of undertrials in jails.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?


To which one of the following funds are salary and allowances of the Judges of High Court of a State charged?


Mark the best option:
The Government establishes Gram Nyayalaya for every:


Given below is the statement of Legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A judgment which binds only the parties to a suit in which the judgment was passed is called judgment in personam; whereas a judgment which binds all men irrespective of whether they were party to suit or not is known as a judgment in rem.
FACTUAL SITUATION: "Judgment of a competent court determining contractual obligations of the parties to a contract is an example of judgment in personam, but a judgment of a competent court declaring a party to be insolvent is an example of judgment in rem."
Comment on the correctness of this statement.
DECISION:


Read both the statements carefully and answer.
Assertion (A):
The entries in the three legislative lists are not always set out with scientific Precision.
Reason (R): The entries are not powers but are only fields of legislation.


Which of the following lawyers approached the Supreme Court challenging the existing system of 'designation of Senior Advocates'?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×