Plea not taken in the Arbitration cannot be raised in S.34 or in the SLP - SC

Arbitration is kept beyond the technical complex procedures prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure & Evidence Act. Arbitration Procedure can be either decided by the parties jointly or by the arbitrator in consultation with parties, in case of Adhoc Arbitration. If it is an institutional Arbitration the procedure prescribed in the Rules of the Arbitral Institution, shall have to be followed. The foundation of Arbitration is giving equal opportunity to all the parties. Leaving that the arbitration procedure is very flexible and the arbitrator need not be very strict in the pleadings also.

But a recent Arbitration appeal which came up for hearing before Supreme Court of India, proves that pleadings before the Arbitrator is also important and a party cannot take a new ground which was never raised before the Arbitrator, while challenging the arbitration award. That means in the application filed under S.34, grounds which were not raised before the arbitrator cannot be raised. This is mainly because if Arbitrator had the chance of examining that ground he would have changed his verdict.

Facts of the case:  Union of India (Railways) granted a works contract to M/S. Suska (P) Ltd for the repairing work of Traction motors of Electric Locomotive type. Disputes arose between the parties and the Respondent contractor invoked Arbitration and the Arbitrator allowed many of the claims and granted Pre-Arbitration interest, pendent lite interest and also future interest. Union of India challenged the said award in the High Court of Bombay under S.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. The Single Judge of the High Court upheld the award except certain modifications to the award relating to certain heads of interest. Union of India did not choose to file any appeal against the order of the Single Judge. The Division bench set aside the order of the Single Judge, holding that none of the grounds raised by Union of India, can be raised in a S.34 Application. Hence Union of India challenged the Judgment of division bench before the Supreme Court of India.

Decision of the Court: The only point argued in the Special Leave Petition was Clause.13 of the contract between the parties provide that no interest shall be payable to the contractor upon the earnest money or security deposit or the amounts payable under the contract. But the Supreme Court of India vide a detailed Judgment dated 08th December 2017 in the case of Union of India (Railways) Versus Suska (P) Ltd., 2017 online SCC 1436, dismissed the appeal on the following two grounds:

a. The above said argument was first time raised in the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court of India, hence not permissible, even though it is a valid ground.

b. A Government should not flight with a citizen on technical grounds, when the facts say it is a fair decision.

Transfer petition in favor of the wife

What is a Transfer Petition?

Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure enables the Supreme Court to transfer any Case, appeal or other proceedings from High Court or other civil court in one State to a High Court or other civil court in any other State. This power can be and generally is exercised by the Supreme Court of India if the matter suffices the need for justice. Hence wide powers are given to the Supreme Court to order a transfer if it feels that the ends of justice so require.

Convenience of the Wife as an argument

Although as a common trend, the Supreme Court used to take a soft side towards the transfer petition filed by the wife. As in the cases given below, the convenience of the wife was a prominent point to be taken into consideration. However, nowadays, it is to be noted that the trend of feminism in Supreme Court decisions is such that the decisions are purely based on logical arguments. The “soft side for women”  is not anymore visible in the later supreme court decisions. That being said, it does not mean that the courts do not consider convenience of the wife as an argument.

For example,

In the case of Smt. Neeraja Gupta Vs. Dr. Rajesh Gupta, 2002(1) HLR 273, this Court allowed the transfer application filed by the wife but from Jind to Mansa instead of from Jind to Abohar on the ground that convenience of the wife has to be looked into.

In the case of Boby Rani alias Babita Vs. Suresh Kumar, 2011(1) HLR 284, this Court has allowed the transfer petition on the ground that convenience of the wife is to be seen. In this case wife is 70% handicapped.

However, in the case of Veena v. Vinay Kumar, 1992 (1) HLR 380, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the application under Section 24 of CPC instituted by the wife for transfer of divorce petition on the ground that she pleaded for her convenience alone and failed to make out a case for transfer of proceedings at Jagadhri to Ferozepur in terms of Secton 24 CPC. The court ruled that the convenience of one party to the litigation i.e. wife alone, cannot be accepted as of rule. The Court is required to adopt a balanced view of convenience of both the parties, of course may be with some premium in favour of the wife.

In the case of Mona Aresh Goel vs Aresh Satya Goel on 21 March, 2000, where in the transfer petition was filed by the wife to transfer the divorce proceedings taken by the husband in Bombay to Delhi, where she stayed with her parents. The transfer petition avers that the wife had no independent income and that her parents were not in a position to bear the expenses of her travel from Delhi to Bombay to contest the divorce proceedings. She averred that she is twenty-two years old and cannot travel to and stay in Bombay alone for, there is no one in Bombay with whom she can stay. Hence the court allowed such a petition in these circumstances.

A very poignant and logical judgment was observed in Premlata Singh v. Rita Singh  wherein this Court had not transferred the proceedings but directed the husband to pay for travelling, lodging and boarding expenses of the wife and/or person accompanying her for each hearing. The said principle was also followed in Gana Saraswathi v. H. Raghu Prasad.

In the case of Santhini vs Vijaya Venketesh on 9 October, 2017, the court cited various cases. The court before reaching the final conclusions made a reference to the following cases, it made apt to refer to the decisions that have been noted in Krishna Veni Nagam. In Mona Aresh Goel ( as discussed above) the three-Judge Bench was dealing with the transfer of the matrimonial proceedings for divorce that was instituted by the husband in Bombay. The prayer of the wife was to transfer the case from Bombay to Delhi. The averment was made that the wife had no independent income and her parents were not in a position to bear the expenses of her travel from Delhi to Bombay to contest the divorce proceedings. That apart, various inconveniences were set forth and the husband chose not to appear in the Transfer Petition. The Court, considering the difficulties of the wife, transferred the case from Bombay to Delhi. In Lalita A. Ranga, the Court, taking note of the fact that the husband had not appeared and further appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case, thought it appropriate to transfer the petition so that the wife could contest the proceedings. Be it noted, the wife had a small child and she was at Jaipur and it was thought that it would be difficult for her to go to Bombay to contest the proceedings from time to time. In Deepa’s case, the stand of the wife was that she was unemployed and had no source of income and, on that basis, the prayer of transfer was allowed. In Archana Rastogi, the Court entertained the plea of transfer and held that the prayer for transfer of matrimonial proceedings taken by the husband in the Court of District Judge, Chandigarh to the Court of District Judge, Delhi deserved acceptance and, accordingly, transferred the case. Similarly, in Leena Mukherjee, the prayer for transfer was allowed. In Neelam Bhatia, the Court declined to transfer the case and directed the husband to bear the to-and-fro travelling expenses of the wife and one person accompanying her by train whenever she actually appeared before the Court. In Soma Choudhury, taking into consideration the difficulties of the wife, the proceedings for divorce were transferred from the Court of District Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur (Tripura) to the Family Court at Alipore (West Bengal). In Anju Ohri case, the Court, on the foundation of the convenience of the parties and the interest of justice, allowed the transfer petition preferred by the wife. In Vandana Sharma, the Court, taking note of the fact that the wife had two minor daughters and appreciating the difficulty on the said bedrock, thought it appropriate to transfer the case and, accordingly, so directed.

The UK Just Decided That 10 Mbps Broadband Should be a Legal Right

The United Kingdom has vowed to make access to broadband speed internet a legal right for its citizens. Earlier this year, the passage of the Digital Economy Act ensured that by 2020, all residents of the UK will have the right to demand broadband service at speeds of at least 10 Mbps (compromised down from 30 Mbps) through a provision in the law called the Universal Service Obligation. Specific details on how the government would ensure this, however, are not included in the law.

In response to this provision, one of the UK’s largest broadband providers, BT, promised to abide by the goal and pledged to spend upwards of £600 million (more than $800 million) to extend service into the hardest to reach rural areas of the country. However, an announcement from the government states that they intend to go the regulatory route to ensure compliance.

“We know how important broadband is to homes and businesses and we want everyone to benefit from a fast and reliable connection. We are grateful to BT for their proposal but have decided that only a regulatory approach will make high-speed broadband a reality for everyone in the UK, regardless of where they live or work,” said Culture Secretary Karen Bradley.

Banks Can't Swap Customer Accounts For Gas Subsidy Without Consent: UIDAI

Inquiries by the Aadhaar body revealed that when customers went to banks to link their Aadhaar number with their accounts, the banks also passed on the Aadhaar-linked bank account details to the government's central database of Aadhaar-linked bank accounts for transferring subsidies under various schemes.

Hoping to clamp down on the possible misuse of the rule to link Aadhaar to bank accounts, UIDAI, the agency that governs Aadhaar, has ordered banks to get explicit consent from every customer before they swap the bank account in which cooking gas subsidy and other benefits were deposited by the government.
 
The directive comes weeks after multiple complaints from people that they had stopped receiving cooking gas subsidies in their specified bank account after they linked their Aadhaar number to a second bank account or an Airtel mobile number.
 
Inquiries by the Aadhaar body revealed that when customers went to banks to link their Aadhaar number to their accounts, the banks also passed on details of the Aadhaar-linked bank account to the government's central database of bank accounts for transferring subsidies under various schemes.
 
The system had been designed in a way that the central database would replace the old bank account with the new. "So if a person was getting his cooking gas subsidy in one bank account and went to update a different bank account, he would get the subsidy in the account linked with Aadhaar last," a government official explained.
 
Except that the customer did not know that he had 'requested' for updating his account details for government subsidy.
 
But this wasn't a technical glitch. Many banks, the official said, used this design to shore up deposits.

Kerala High Court upholds expulsion of student for hugging female friend in school

Court has upheld the decision of a Thiruvananthapuram school to expel a Class XII student for hugging a female schoolmate.

The incident had taken place on July 21, when the 16-year-old hugged the girl from Class XI who won a prize in an art competition. The boy had also uploaded the pictures on social media, which irked the school authorities, who claimed that he had breached the school’s disciplinary rule by doing so.

The student’s parents then approached the court challenging their son’s expulsion. The Kerala State Commission for Protection of Child Rights had also stated two months ago during the hearing that the child is allowed to sit for classes in the school.

However, the court recently held that the institution’s head was the guardian of the school and it was the principal’s responsibility to maintain decorum and ‘morality’ inside the school, adding that the child’s rights body cannot interfere in the issue.

Why punish married men alone for adultery, asks SC

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to examine the constitutional validity of a 157-year-old 'gender discriminatory' provision+ in Indian Penal Code which punishes a married man for adultery for consensual sexual relations with another man's wife. 

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud sought the Centre's response in four weeks to a PIL by Joseph Shine from Kerala who is employed at Trento in Italy on why a married man alone and not the consenting wife of another should be hauled up. 

What persuaded the SC to examine the constitutional validity of what it felt might be an archaic provision was the clean chit given to the woman, irrespective of her role in the adulterous relationship, as also counsel Kaleeswaram Raj's argument that as per Section 497 no offence of adultery is committed if there was consensual sexual relation between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman; an unmarried man and a married woman; and between a married man and an unmarried woman. 

Section 497 states: "Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor." 

The bench said: "Prima facie, on a perusal of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, we find that it grants relief to the wife by treating her as a victim. It is also worthy to note that when an offence is committed by both of them, one is liable for the criminal offence but the other is absolved. It seems to be based on a societal presumption." 

"Ordinarily, criminal law proceeds on gender neutrality but in this provision, as we perceive, the said concept is absent. That apart, it is to be seen when there is conferment of any affirmative right on women, can it go to the extent of treating them as the victim, in all circumstances" while leaving the adulterous married man to face the grind of the law, the CJI-led bench said. 

The apex court's constitutional approach also stumbled upon another aberration in Section 497, which provided that it is not adultery if a married man had sexual relationship with a married woman with her husband's consent or connivance. The bench said: "it is perceivable from the language employed in the Section that the fulcrum of the offence is destroyed once the consent or the connivance of the husband is established. Viewed from the said scenario, the provision really creates a dent on the individual independent identity of a woman when the emphasis is laid on the connivance or the consent of the husband. This tantamount to subordination of a woman where the Constitution confers equal status." 

While seeking the Centre's response within four weeks, the bench said: "A time has come when the society must realise that a woman is equal to a man in every field. This provision, prima facie, appears to be quite archaic. When the society progresses and the rights are conferred, the new generation of thoughts spring, and that is why, we are inclined to issue notice." 

Bombay high court upholds validity of RERA

The Act provides for curbs on builders and developers in execution of construction projects, penalising them for delay in completing projects and safeguarding flat-buyers from unscrupulous builders.

The Bombay high court (HC) on Wednesday dismissed a bunch of provisions challenging 18 provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, which regulates construction industry and protects interests of flat purchasers, upholding its constitutional validity.

The Act provides for curbs on builders and developers in execution of construction projects, penalising them for delay in completing projects and safeguarding flat-buyers from unscrupulous builders.

A bench of justice Naresh Patil and justice Rajesh Ketkar, however, allowed the Real Estate Regulatory Authority to grant extension beyond one year -- limit set by the enactment – to complete projects under exceptional and compelling circumstances.

“Having careful scrutiny of relevant provisions of RERA (the Act), its object and scheme and submissions advanced, we have harmoniously construed sections 6, 7, 8 and 37,” the bench said. “We hold in case the Authority is satisfied that there are exceptional and circumstances due to which promoter could not complete the project in spite of extension granted under section 6, then the Authority would be entitled to continue registration for completing the project,” it said.

This comes as a major reprieve for builders and developers, as they will get additional period – over and above the stipulated period of one year – to complete their projects, in case the work is delayed due to circumstances beyond their control.

The bench has, however, clarified that this power to grant additional extension can be exercised by the Authority only in exceptional and compelling circumstances and on case to case basis, and no builder or developer can seek such an additional extension beyond the stipulated one year period as a matter of right.

The court held the two-member bench of a majority of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal must comprise one judicial member and majority of the bench must comprise judicial officers where it has more than two members. It struck down part of section 46(1)(b) which required the judicial members of the Appellate Tribunal to have served as additional secretary to the government in addition to having been a judicial officer.

SC asks woman to behave properly with husband and mother in-law

The Supreme Court has asked a wife to go along with her husband, “behave properly” with the aged mother-in-law, saying “everything is still not lost” in their relationship.

The top court also restrained the family members of the wife from interfering with the peaceful living of the couple and asked the woman not to leave the company of the husband without its permission.

A bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and Deepak Gupta, after interacting with the couple, said the two would be given a chance to live together at least for a few weeks.

It kept the case pending before it and listed the matter for further hearing on January 17.

The husband had moved the apex court challenging an order of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the matrimonial dispute. The court had earlier directed both the parties for mediation to sort out their differences.

“We find that the parties should be given a chance to live together for a few weeks, keeping the case pending before us. Accordingly, respondent (wife) is directed to go with the petitioner (husband) today from the Court. The respondent is directed to behave herself properly and look after the petitioner and his aged mother,” the bench said.

It noted that the wife has not instituted any case except one for maintenance.

“Nobody from the family of the respondent shall interfere with their peaceful living. Without permission from the Court, respondent shall not leave the company of the petitioner,” the bench said.

(The court restrained the family members of the wife from interfering with the peaceful living of the couple and asked the woman not to leave the company of the husband without its permission.)

National Register Of Citizens: Supreme Court Allows Gram Panchayat Certificates To Be Used As Identity Document For Claiming Citizenship

The Supreme Court has allowed certificates issued by Gram panchayat(GP)or executive magistrate to be used as identity document for claiming citizenship if issued after conducting proper enquiries.

The apex court set aside the order of Gauhati High Court by which it had invalidated these certificates for claiming citizenship.

The move is likely to bring relief to lakhs of women in the state who use the document to establish linkage with fathers and husbands.

The GP certificate is used to validate residence of a person. It used to open bank accounts, apply for mobile numbers and so forth.

The lead petition was filed by Monowara Bewa (40), a resident of Dhubri district in Assam. She had been marked as a doubtful or ‘D-voter’ by the local election authority. Her family claims that she had switched addresses and not de-registered from her prior constituency.

A foreigner tribunal had discarded most of her documents as unable to prove that she was a citizen. The GP certificate was an important document to establish her citizenship and her linkage with her parental family since becoming a widow.

The foreigner tribunal, and later the Gauhati High Court, did not accept the GP certificate and referred to it as a “private document”. The Supreme Court has now restored the applicability of the document in establishing linkage to other documents that prove citizenship.

However, Monowara’s counsel said that her appeal against her being detected as a ‘foreigner’ by the foreigner tribunal has not yet been decided.

According to the provisions of a clause of Schedule of the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003, "the names of persons who are originally inhabitants of the state of Assam and their children and descendants, who are citizens of India, shall be included in the consolidated list if the citizenship of such persons is ascertained beyond reasonable doubt and to the satisfaction of the registering authority".

The Supreme Court on Nov 20 had pulled up the Assam government for making a "sweeping statement" that 15 per cent of the state population were tribals who have not participated in modernisation and were away from the mainstream.

The top court said it was a "dangerous statement" on the state's behalf and was neither good for the health of the people, nor the government as 15 per cent population was a huge chunk.

The court's observation came after Assam's counsel referred to this issue and said the government was trying to make them come forward in the ongoing process of updation and publication of draft National Register of Citizens (NRC) in the state.

This is not the way to do it. From where you are making these statements. These kind of sweeping statements are not good for the health of the people and health of the state. 15 per cent is a huge chunk. If you say 15 per cent population is not in the mainstream, we will ask what have you done in this regard as a state," the bench said.

The NRC of 1951 is being updated for Assam in accordance with the tripartite agreement between the state and central governments and the All Assam Students Union (AASU), which was arrived at in 2005 to implement the 1985 Assam Accord.

The apex court was earlier told that as on November 22, a total of 3.29 crore claims have been made for inclusion in the NRC, which is being prepared to identify illegal migrants.

With inputs from PTI

SC calls for regulating hefty fees of lawyers

The astronomical fees charged by lawyers and the commercialisation of the legal profession is a violation of the fundamental right of the poor to get equal justice, the Supreme Court held in a judgment pronounced on Tuesday.

A Bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit, in a scathing judgment on the state of the legal profession, said that neither the Bar nor the judiciary have made any move to regularise the hefty fees charged by lawyers from the poor and the needy.

A report filed by the Law Commission way back in 1988 to regularise lawyers’ fees continues to be in cold storage. The very essence of the legal profession is to provide inexpensive access to justice, the court observed.

The apex court urged for a law to check the violation of professional ethics by lawyers.

The judgment came in the case of B. Sunitha, a woman from Telangana whose husband died in a road accident. She was made to sign a cheque for three lakh by a lawyer who represented her accident claims case in the lower courts. This was over and above the 10 lakh she had already paid to him.

In her petition in the apex court, filed through Supreme Court advocate K. Parameshwar, Ms. Sunitha argued that the lawyer had exploited her trust.

“The confidence of the public in the legal profession is integral to the confidence of the public in the legal system,” the Supreme Court observed.

Poker is gambling and cannot be permitted: HC

 Putting an end to a controversy, Gujarat high court on Monday held that the game of poker is gambling and hence cannot be permitted.

Various petitioners who wanted to organize poker house in the city had approached the high court last year after they did not get permission from city police to organize the game. These petitioners told the court that cops were silent on the grant of permission for the game of poker and there were attempts on part of local police stations to stop the game.

Some associations of poker organizers like Indian Poker Association too involved in the litigation and asserted that poker cannot be considered a gambling and the gaming zones should be permitted to organize poker room in the city.

The high court was reluctant to entertain nearly a dozen such applications on technical ground that the nature of litigation was civil, but the petitions were filed as criminal applications. The petitioners withdrew all the applications to file them afresh on civil side.

Accordingly, fresh petitions were filed and the issue was debated at length. The state government vehemently opposed any kind of permission for poker in Gujarat on the ground that it is gambling and if allowed, the game has potential to spoil lives of people who play the game.

Panel of ministers orders arrest of eight Noida builders

A group of ministers, set up by the UP government to sort out the mess in Noida's real estate sector, directed Gautam Budh Nagar SSP Love Kumar on Monday to arrest eight builders for not delivering 5,000 flats to homebuyers. However, Noida officials refused to name these builders.

In September, police had lodged 13 FIRs against six builders with projects in Noida and Greater Noida. FIRs were registered against Amrapali, Supertech, Alpine Realtech, Proview group, Today Homes, and JNC Constructions following meetings held by the same three-member cabinet committee in August. The builders were booked under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code.

Urban housing minister Suresh Khanna, one of the three ministers in the group, further directed the SSP to initiate action against all builders who have failed to hand over possession to homebuyers and have FIRs against them.

The committee emphasised that builders have to be pushed to deliver 50,000 flats by the end of December, a goal UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath had set in August.

Officials said the three development authorities - Noida, Greater Noida, and Yamuna Expressway - have a roadmap to deliver 32,500 flats by the end of the year. But the committee has now asked for a plan to deliver the remaining 17,500 units.

Apart from urban housing minister Khanna, UP industries minister Satish Mahana, and state minister (independent charge) of cane development and sugar mills Suresh Rana are part of the committee.

Monday's directions came after a closed-door review meeting held by the ministerial committee in New Delhi. While Noida Authority has conveyed to the committee that 11,000 flats will be delivered in Noida, builders of Greater Noida have promised 14,000 apartments. Yamuna Expressway Authority has promised 7,525 flats, including, 2,970 houses the authority has built.

According to Noida Authority officials, 5,771 completion certificates have been handed over to builders since August 2017. Of these 5,670 flats were handed over by November. Besides, 3,791 flats are being fast-tracked for year-end delivery.

Greater Noida Authority officials told the group of ministers that they have already given possession of 4,529 flats. About 9,671 are over 90% complete and should get completion certificates this month. About 5,000 flats in Greater Noida are being pushed for completion by January 2018.

US Supreme Court allows full enforcement of Trump travel ban

The US Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to fully enforce a ban on travel to the United States by residents of six mostly Muslim countries.

The justices, with two dissenting votes, said early Tuesday morning (IST) that the policy can take full effect even as legal challenges against it make their way through the courts. The action suggests the high court could uphold the latest version of the ban that Trump announced in September.

The ban applies to travellers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen. Lower courts had said people from those nations with a claim of a "bona fide" relationship with someone in the United States could not be kept out of the country. Grandparents, cousins and other relatives were among those courts said could not be excluded.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would have left the lower court orders in place .

The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals and the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, will be holding arguments on the legality of the ban this week.

Both courts are dealing with the issue on an accelerated basis, and the Supreme Court noted it expects those courts to reach decisions "with appropriate dispatch."

Quick resolution by appellate courts would allow the Supreme Court to hear and decide the issue this term, by the end of June.

Correction (Name, Address, Mobile Number, DOB)

If you need to make any corrections in your Aadhaar card whether it is Name, Address, Mobile number or Date of birth, it is very easy to do the same. Here in this article we will be discussing about convenient way to solve this problem that most of us are facing.

How to Change Name, Address In Aadhar Card (Aadhar Card Update)

Making Aadhar Card correction of our bio-data gets more convenient with the online process as it eliminates the need of running around to the Aadhaar centre physically. You can now very easily make corrections to your details like Aadhaar Card name, address, mobile number, date of birth by going through few steps that we will be taking you through in this post below.

Aadhaar Card Correction Online: Name, Address, Phone, DOB!

There are many reasons pertaining to which one needs to make a change in his/her Aadhaar card. So, there is an easy way to deal with this issue which will help you change any of your personal details on your Aadhaar Card. Still not many people are aware of the process to make Aadhaar card corrections.

Please read the following steps very carefully one after another for clear understanding of the correction process.

Change of name – For changing your name or any Aadhaar Card correction you need an most recent and updated Identity Proof documents. Once you change your name officially, you will be provided with a new document of Identity Proof which you have to upload on your PC to replace your previosuly registered name with the new one. So, having Identity Proof documents is mandatory for changing your name in Aadhaar Card.

Change of address – Changing Address is also similar to that of changing name in the Aadhaar Card. However, sometimes due to one reason or other, people prefer to leave their homeland and shift base to new towns and cities for better opportunities. So, in this case changing the address in Aadhaar card becomes crucial and for doing so you will be required to upload your original registered address of your homeland.

Change of date of birth – Most of the time changing date of birth becomes important as sometimes the added date is either no correct or people want to show different date of birth for getting admissions in new academics or for some other reasons. So, for changing your date of birth in Aadhaar Card you need to have the original date of birth certificate and upload it online.

Steps to Change Name, Address, Mobile Number, Date of Birth through Online

The process of updating and correcting your name, address, mobile number, date of birth requires you to first go to this link https://ssup.uidai.gov.in/web/guest/update

Before you start the procedure on online Aadhaar card correction, you need to have a registered mobile number in place. Once you have that, you need to follow the steps mentioned below:

• Firstly, when you visit the page after clicking on the aforementioned link, you will be asked your Aadhaar number which consist 12 digits.
• In the following column you will find the verification notification.
• You can now easily click on “SEND OTP” button.
• Now, 6 digit OTP will be delivered on your mobile and you can fill the password and go on.
• You have to choose the address change field and choose the language you prefer.
• Finally you have to upload the document of which you want to make necessary changes.

 (Name, Address, Mobile Number, DOB)

If you need to make any corrections in your Aadhaar card whether it is Name, Address, Mobile number or Date of birth, it is very easy to do the same. Here in this article we will be discussing about convenient way to solve this problem that most of us are facing.

How to Change Name, Address In Aadhar Card (Aadhar Card Update)

Making Aadhar Card correction of our bio-data gets more convenient with the online process as it eliminates the need of running around to the Aadhaar centre physically. You can now very easily make corrections to your details like Aadhaar Card name, address, mobile number, date of birth by going through few steps that we will be taking you through in this post below.

Aadhaar Card Correction Online: Name, Address, Phone, DOB!

There are many reasons pertaining to which one needs to make a change in his/her Aadhaar card. So, there is an easy way to deal with this issue which will help you change any of your personal details on your Aadhaar Card. Still not many people are aware of the process to make Aadhaar card corrections.

Please read the following steps very carefully one after another for clear understanding of the correction process.

Change of name – For changing your name or any Aadhaar Card correction you need an most recent and updated Identity Proof documents. Once you change your name officially, you will be provided with a new document of Identity Proof which you have to upload on your PC to replace your previosuly registered name with the new one. So, having Identity Proof documents is mandatory for changing your name in Aadhaar Card.

Change of address – Changing Address is also similar to that of changing name in the Aadhaar Card. However, sometimes due to one reason or other, people prefer to leave their homeland and shift base to new towns and cities for better opportunities. So, in this case changing the address in Aadhaar card becomes crucial and for doing so you will be required to upload your original registered address of your homeland.

Change of date of birth – Most of the time changing date of birth becomes important as sometimes the added date is either no correct or people want to show different date of birth for getting admissions in new academics or for some other reasons. So, for changing your date of birth in Aadhaar Card you need to have the original date of birth certificate and upload it online.

Steps to Change Name, Address, Mobile Number, Date of Birth through Online

The process of updating and correcting your name, address, mobile number, date of birth requires you to first go to this link https://ssup.uidai.gov.in/web/guest/update

Before you start the procedure on online Aadhaar card correction, you need to have a registered mobile number in place. Once you have that, you need to follow the steps mentioned below:

• Firstly, when you visit the page after clicking on the aforementioned link, you will be asked your Aadhaar number which consist 12 digits.
• In the following column you will find the verification notification.
• You can now easily click on “SEND OTP” button.
• Now, 6 digit OTP will be delivered on your mobile and you can fill the password and go on.
• You have to choose the address change field and choose the language you prefer.
• Finally you have to upload the document of which you want to make necessary changes.

Supreme Court dismisses CJAR petition, imposes costs of 25 lakh

The controversy in the Supreme Court surrounding the medical college scam and alleged bribery of judges came to a close today, as the Court dismissed the petition filed by Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR).

The matter was heard by the same Bench that had heard and dismissed Kamini Jaiswal’s petition in this regard – Justices RK Agrawal, Arun Mishra and AM Khanwilkar.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for CJAR, had argued that it was imperative that an SIT headed by a retired Chief Justice of India be formed in order to preserve and protect the integrity of the judiciary.

He apprised the Bench of the FIR filed by the CBI and reiterated that such a sensitive issue should not be left for investigation by a body controlled by the executive.

Attorney General KK Venugopal, appearing for the Central government, had argued that the submissions made by Bhushan were repetitive and very similar to the ones made in the earlier petition filed by Kamini Jaiswal.

The two petitions had sparked an unprecedented controversy in the Supreme Court.

Both petitions stemmed from an FIR filed by the CBI in which there were allegations of an attempt to influence high public functionaries for settling a case in the Supreme Court. This particular case was heard by a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud.

Unprecedented events in the Court followed, as the petitioners had demanded the recusal of two judges – CJI Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar – from hearing the case, alleging conflict of interest, since both judges were part of the Bench that had heard the medical college matter.

Interestingly, Jaiswal’s plea was identical to the petition filed by CJAR (which had been listed before another Bench). This would lead to allegations of forum shopping for attempting to bypass the CJI’s prerogative to list cases. The Court had noted the same while dismissing that petition, and also rebuked the petitioners for contemptuous conduct.

And now, the petition filed by CJAR has met with a similar fate, with the Court additionally imposing costs of Rs. 25 lakh on the petitioner.