Fwd: Post Delhi rout NDA Cabinet doubles authorised capital of NMDC+ SC admits plea on courts upholding church annulments HT report

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: sanjeev nayyar

1. Post Delhi rout NDA Cabinet doubles authorised capital of NMDC (national minorites development and finance corporation) to Rs 3,000 crs. NMDFC provides soft loans to minority communities for self-employment and economic development. http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/cabinet-clears-doubling-of-nmdfcs-authorised-capital-115021001635_1.html

 

This sort of reaction is one what would have expected from the Congress. Do poor Hindus not deserve such a facility. How different is NDA 2 from Congress.

 

2. SC agreed to examine a petition asking it to direct civil courts to uphold a church court's order nullifying marriage of a Christian couple.

 

Spoke to a Christian friend who said every divorce of a Christian has to be first annulled by Church and then normal court proceedings. He said that Church approval is required if person wants to get married in Church again. Two said that Code of Canon Law worked during British times, it is a set of principles not law.

 

What is the concept of a Church Court? Did the law provide for its existence before UPA 1 ie 2004. What is the Code of Canon Law? Can someone enlighten. 

 

SC admits plea on courts upholding church annulments 10/2/15

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/sc-admits-plea-on-courts-upholding-church-annulments/article1-1315295.aspx

 

The Supreme Court Monday strongly advocated keeping religious beliefs away from civil disputes in families, but at the same time agreed to examine a petition asking it to direct civil courts to uphold a church court's order nullifying marriage of a Christian couple.

As per an earlier SC verdict, Christians have to move a civil court for divorce. But their personal law permits them to get marriage nullified by a church court which, in the wake of the top court order, is not valid.

Senior counsel Soli Sorabjee, is representing petitioner Clarence Pais, 84 — who claims that if courts in India recognise dissolution of marriage under Mohammedan Law, it should also recognise dissolution of marriage by Christians under Code of Canon Law — the personal law of Catholics.

The bench, headed by justice Vikramjit Sen, expressing concern at the growing number of honour killings and said allowing the PIL could open a Pandora's Box as people from all religions would approach the court requesting to let them carry along their personal law. "We have to stamp out religion from civil law," justice Sen noted. The bench asked additional solicitor general to file a response to the PIL and gave four weeks to the centre to respond.

The matter was posted for further hearing to April 8.

 

Warm Regards
sanjeev nayyar

https://twitter.com/sanjeev1927
To unsubscribe write back

--

sent from samsung galaxy note, so please excuse brevity