INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN INDIA: EXPLAINED HORIZONTALLY BY - PRIYANSH KANAWAT

Authors : PRIYANSH KANAWAT

Registration ID : 107819 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7819

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : priyansh23@nluassam.ac.in

Page No : 15 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-42286814/RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN INDIA: EXPLAINED HOR

SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW IP INJECTION CAN INCREASE THE FRUITFULNESS OF AEC AND ITS GOAL OF 2025 BY - ABHISHEK SHARMA, ANNANY MAMGAIN & ARYAN GARG

Authors : ABHISHEK SHARMA, ANNANY MAMGAIN & ARYAN GARG

Registration ID : 107817 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7817 & IJLRA7818

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : abhisheksharma6820000@gmail.com & mamgainannany@gmail.com

Page No : 22 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-64869658/SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW IP INJECTION CAN

UNDERSTANDING CYBER ESPIONAGE AND STATE-SPONSORED ATTACKS BY - DEEPANSHI SRIVASTAVA

Authors : DEEPANSHI SRIVASTAVA

Registration ID : 107816 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7816

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : deepanshisrivastava462@gmail.com

Page No : 18 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-32156566/UNDERSTANDING CYBER ESPIONAGE AND STATE-SPONSORED

AN OVERVIEW OF DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL BY- AYUSH PATIDAR & SNEHA SHARMA

Authors : AYUSH PATIDAR & SNEHA SHARMA

Registration ID : 107814 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7814 & IJLRA7815

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : ayushpatidar99933@gmail.com & sharmasneha00123@gmail.com

Page No : 18 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-13997372/AN OVERVIEW OF DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL

CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON THE GAP IN SEBI DISGORGEMENT ORDERS: SAFEGUARDING THE INTERESTS OF AFFECTED INVESTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS BY- AYUSH PATIDAR

Authors : AYUSH PATIDAR

Registration ID : 107813 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7813

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : ayushpatidar99933@gmail.com

Page No : 16 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-16812149/CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON THE GAP IN SEBI DISGORGEMENT

ASSESSMENT OF BUYER POWER IN COMPETITION LAW: A BOON OR A THREAT BY - DR. GAGAN DEEP KOUR

Authors : DR. GAGAN DEEP KOUR

Registration ID : 107812 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7812

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : gagan.056deep@gmail.com

Page No : 15 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-89357789/ASSESSMENT OF BUYER POWER IN COMPETITION LAW: A BO

CONSTITUTIONALISM VIS-À-VIS CONSTITUTION: EVOLUTION AND UTILITY IN MODERN DEMOCRATIC INDIA BY - MOHAMMAD SALEEM & RAKA MEDHAVI

Authors : MOHAMMAD SALEEM & RAKA MEDHAVI

Registration ID : 107810 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7810 & IJLRA7811

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : speaktosaleem.amu@gmail.com & rakamedhavi@srmuniversity.ac.in

Page No : 14 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-27893598/CONSTITUTIONALISM VIS-À-VIS CONSTITUTION: EVOLUTI

CASE ANALYSIS ON IN RE INNOVATIO IP VENTURES, LLC PATENT LITIGATION BY: SAKSHI AGRAWAL & SATYAM SINGH

Authors : SAKSHI AGRAWAL & SATYAM SINGH

Registration ID : 107808 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7808 & IJLRA7809

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : 23jgls-sakshi@jgu.edu.in & 23jgls-ssingh1@jgu.edu.in

Page No : 14 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-83819422/CASE ANALYSIS ON IN RE INNOVATIO IP VENTURES, LLC

CASE COMMENTARY ON X VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. BY: JOSNA ANN BINO & JENNY ROSE PG

Authors : JOSNA ANN BINO & JENNY ROSE PG

Registration ID : 107806 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7806 & IJLRA7807

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : josnaann7@gmail.com & jenny.pg@law.christuniversity.in

Page No : 16 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-82795791/CASE COMMENTARY ON X VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

NAVIGATING THE INTERWEAVING LEGAL THREADS OF PARENTAL ALIENATION, BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD AND PARENTAL RIGHTS: A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF CHILD CUSTODY LAWS IN INDIA BY - KARISHMA JAIN & AANCHAL

Authors : KARISHMA JAIN & AANCHAL

Registration ID : 107804 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA7804 & IJLRA7805

Year : May-2024 | Volume : II | Issue : 7

Approved ISSN : 2582-6433 | Country : Delhi, India

Email Id : jainkarishma5999@gmail.com

Page No : 15 | No of times Downloads: 0065

Doi Link : https://www.doi-ds.org/doilink/05.2024-66475362/NAVIGATING THE INTERWEAVING LEGAL THREADS OF PAREN

International journal for legal research and analysis

Abbreviation:IJLRA

ISSN:2582-6433

Website:https://www.ijlra.com/

Accessibility:Open Access

License:Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript:Click here

Licensing:

All research articles published INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

[1] People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, (1982) 3 SCC 235: 1982 SCC (L&S) 275 at page 252

[2] Vishal Jeet vs Union of India and Ors, 1990 SCR (2) 861

[3] Doe, John. "Legal Framework for Combating Human Trafficking in India." (2018)

[4] "Victim Protection Mechanisms in Indian Anti-Trafficking Laws." International Law Journal of Judicial Sciences 32 (2017): 189-215.

[5] State Of U.P. And Anr vs Pramod Kumar Shukla and Anr, 2008 (12) SCC 267

[6] Vishal Jeet vs Union Of India And Ors, 1990 SCR (2) 861

[7] Public Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, (2004) 12 SCC 381

[8] Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India & Others, 1984 SCR (2) 67

[9] Budhadev Karmaskar vs State of West Bengal, 2011 (11) SCC 538

[10] Budhadev Karmaskar vs State of West Bengal, 2011 (11) SCC 538

[11] Gupta, Priya. "Socioeconomic Determinants of Prostitution: A Case Study of Red-Light Districts in India”, (2018)

[12] Smith, Jane. "Legal Regulation of Prostitution in India." (2019)

[13] Das, Arun. "Beyond Legislation: Addressing the Root Causes of Child Labor in India." Internationl Joural of Law and Human Rights, 32, (2019): 345-378

[14] M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1996 (6) SCC 756

[2] Rodolfo C. Severino, ASEAN and the World, in Southeast Asia in Search of an ASEAN Community 256–341 (2006).

[3] Keith E. Maskus, Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Development, 32 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 471 (2000

[4] Edmund W. Sim, The Outsourcing of Legal Norms and Institutions by the ASEAN Economic Community, 1 Indon. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 314 (2014).

[5] Rodolfo C. Severino & Moe Thuzar, ASEAN Economic Cooperation and Its Political Realities, in Moving the AEC Beyond 2015: Managing Domestic Consensus for Community-Building 24–43 (Siew Yean Tham & Sanchita Basu Das eds., 2017)

[6] Chien-Huei Wu, ASEAN at the Crossroads: Trap and Track between CPTPP and RCEP, Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 23, Issue 1, March 2020, Pages 97–117,

[7] Muhammad Rifky Wicaksono , Kusuma Raditya , Laurensia Andrini , Muhammad Hawin , Paripurna Sugarda, Herliana & Hariyanto, Implementing the Extraterritoriality Principle to Strengthen Competition Law Enforcement in Indonesia in the AEC Era: A Comparative Study, 9 Indon. L. Rev. 27 (2019)

[8] Mark McGillivray et al., Understanding the ASEAN Development Gap, in The 3rd ASEAN Reader 95–98 (2015).

[9] Paul Belleflamme, Martin Peitz, Intellectual Property, in Industrial Organization: Markets and Strategies , 531–572

[10] Digital technologies, intellectual property and development, in Trade Governance in the Digital Age: World Trade Forum 365–454 (Mira Burri & Thomas Cottier eds., 2012).

[11] Keith E. Maskus, Teaching the economics of intellectual property rights in the global economy, in Teaching of Intellectual Property: Principles and Methods 166–184 (Yo Takagi, Larry Allman, & Mpazi A. Sinjela eds., 2008).

[12] Ching-Fu Lin, The Emergence of ASEAN Regional Food Safety Governance: Structure, Substance, and Context, 74 Food & Drug L.J. 80 (2019)

[13] Nguyen Khanh Doanh & Yoon Heo, Impacts of Intellectual Property Rights on Trade Flows in ASEAN Countries, 14 Journal of International and Area Studies 1–15 (2007).

[14] Steven D. Anderman, Intellectual property rights and competition law in smaller and medium sized open economies, in The Interface Between Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy 313–314 (Steven D. Anderman ed., 2007).

[15] Ivan Morales, Balancing Intellectual Property Rights and Clean Technology Development: Encouraging Cooperation, 17 Hous. J. Health L. & Pol'y 405 (2017).

[16] David P. Schmidt, Intellectual Property Battles in a Technological Global Economy: A Just War Analysis, 14 Business Ethics Quarterly 679–693 (2004).

[18] Asean: e-ASEAN Framework Agreement, 40 International Legal Materials 515–521 (2001).

[19] Stefano Inama & Edmund W. Sim, Overview of ASEAN, in The Foundation of the ASEAN Economic Community: An Institutional and Legal Profile 19–35 (2015).

[20] Irene Calboli, The ASEAN Way or No Way: A Closer Look at the Absence of a Common Rule on Intellectual Property Exhaustion in ASEAN and the Impact on the ASEAN Market, 14 U. Pa. Asian L. Rev. 363 (2019).

[21] Pushpa Thambipillai, The ASEAN-10, in Regional Outlook: Southeast Asia 2011–2012 30–78 (2011).

[22] Sungjoon Cho & Jurgen Kurtz, Legalizing the ASEAN Way: Adapting and Reimagining the ASEAN Investment Regime, 66 Am. J. Comp. L. 233 (2018).

[23] Peter Cornelius, Corporate Practices and National Governance Systems: what Do Country Rankings Tell Us, 6 German L.J. 583 (2005).

[24] 2019 International Property Rights Index, Property Rights Alliance, https://www.internationalpropertyrightsindex.org/country/singapore.

[25] Singapore keeps top spot in Asia for IP protection, The Strait Times, (Oct. 19, 2019), https://www.straitstimes.com/business/economy/singapore-keeps-top-spot-in-asia-for-ip-protection.

[27] R.C. Dreyfuss and J. Pila, Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law, Vol. 1 No. 1, 362 (2018).

[28] Malaysian Intellectual Property Office, http://www.myipo.gov.my/en/about/#:~:text=ABOUT%20MyIPO&text=The%20Division%20was%20tasked%20to,Act%202000%20came%20into%20force.

[29] N.A. Mohamed Yusof, The State of Social Progress in Islamic Societies, Establishing Patent Standard: the Case of Biotechnology Invention in Malaysia, (Apr. 2016).

[30] C. Antons, Intellectual Property in ASEAN countries, European IP Review, Vol. 13 No. 3 (1991)

[31] M. Barthos and Rineke Sara, Dysfunctional IP Infringements and Ineffectiveness of Enforcement Mechanisms under Indonesian Laws, Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, Vol. 22 No.1 (2019).

[33] N. Barizah, The Development of ASEAN’s Intellectual Property Rights Law; From Trips Compliance to Harmonization, Indonesia Law Review (2017), https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/62955-EN-the-development-of-aseans-intellectual-p.pdf.

[37] D. Sharma, Myanmar Passed Legislation to Protect Intellectual Property, Mondaq (Feb. 20, 2019), https://www.mondaq.com/trademark/782500/myanmar-passed-legislation-to-protect-intellectual-property.

[39] A. Sitkoff, IPR Protection and Enforcement in Vietnam is Not as Strong as it Should Be, Vietnam Law Magazine (May 2018), https://vietnamlawmagazine.vn/ipr-protection-and-enforcement-in-vietnam-is-not-as-strong-as-it-should-be-6217.html.

[41]Evan Garcia, Intellectual Property for Development: The ASEAN Story (Aug. 2017), https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2017/04/article_0006.html

[42]ASEAN Framework Agreement on Intellectual Property Cooperation, Bangkok, Thailand (Dec. 15, 1995), https://asean.org/?static_post=asean-framework-agreement-on-intellectual-property-cooperation-bangkok-thailand-15-december-1995.

[44] P. Fowler, T. Charoenpot and C. Chernkwamna, ASEAN and Intellectual Property: Will a Complicated History Lead to a Certain Future?, 40 Loy. L.A. Int’I &Comp. L. Rev. 167 (2017) http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ilr/vol40/iss2/2

[45] C. Antons, Intellectual Property in ASEAN countries, European IP Review, Vol. 13 No. 3 (1991)

[46] IPR Enforcement in South-East Asia, South-East Asia IPR SME Helpdesk (2017), https://www.southeastasia-iprhelpdesk.eu/sites/default/files/publications/EN_Enforcement.pdf.

[52] Anthony De Andrade and V. Vishwanath, Patenting Costs in ASEAN: Upcoming Global Economic Powerhouse, IP Watchdog, (Apr. 17, 2017), https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/04/07/patenting-costs-asean-upcoming-global-economic-powerhouse/id=81695/; See also, Anthony De Andrade and V. Vishwanath, The Cost of Registering a Trademark in Southeast Asia, IP Watchdog, (Jan. 18, 2018), https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/01/18/cost-register-trademark-southeast-asia/id=92311/.

[53] N. Barizah, The Development of ASEAN’s Intellectual Property Rights Law; From Trips Compliance to Harmonization, Indonesia Law Review (2017), https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/62955-EN-the-development-of-aseans-intellectual-p.pdf.

[54] Steve Morrish, counterfeiting in Asia – You Make It, They Fake It, SCMS, (May 17, 2016), https://www.smcs-risk.com/counterfeiting-in-asia/

[56] A. Debray, Myanmar: Myanmar’s new Trademark Law, Mondaq, (Feb. 11, 2020), https://www.mondaq.com/trademark/892264/myanmar39s-new-trademark-law#:~:text=Myanmar%3A%20Myanmar's%20New%20Trademark%20Law&text=Myanmar%20already%20bears%20the%20brunt,ASEAN%20countries%20and%20international%20standards.

[58] ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint, Association of Southeast Asian Nations, (1967)

[59] Intellectual Property Interoperability and the ASEAN Way, in International Intellectual Property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability 1–78 (Elizabeth Siew-Kuan Ng & Graeme W. Austin eds., 2017).

[60] International Intellectual Property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability, (Elizabeth Siew-Kuan Ng & Graeme W. Austin eds., 2017).

[61] Patent Cooperation Treaty, 9 International Legal Materials 978–1025 (1970).

[62] Kristina Jönsson, Authoritarian States in Southeast Asia in Times of Globalization: Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, in Globalization and its Counter-Forces in Southeast Asia 21–50 (2008).

[63] Michael A. Witt, Corporate governance and initial public offerings in Singapore*, in Corporate Governance and Initial Public Offerings: An International Perspective 378–396 (Alessandro Zattoni & William Judge eds., 2012).

[64] Technology Transfer and Development in Asean: Machinery and Electronics Industries, in Technology and Skills in ASEAN: An Overview 97–118 (1988).

[65] Ashish Arora, Andrea Fosfuri & Alfonso Gambardella, Markets for Technology, Intellectual Property Rights, and Development, in International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology Under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime 321–336 (Keith E. Maskus & Jerome H. Reichman eds., 2005).

[66] Rodolfo C. Severino, Institutional Development in ASEAN, in ASEAN-Canada Forum 2008 55–62 (2010).

[67] Mahani Zainal Abidin & Firdaos Rosli, Infrastructure Development in ASEAN, in ASEAN Economic Community Scorecard: Performance and Perception 136–162 (2013).

[68] Bryan Mercurio, Intellectual Property Rights, Trade, and Economic Development, in Law and Development Perspective on International Trade Law 49–80 (Yong-Shik Lee et al. eds., 2011).

[69] Elizabeth Siew-Kuan Ng, ASEAN IP Harmonization: Striking the Delicate Balance, 25 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 129 (2013

[70] Sungjoon Cho & Jurgen Kurtz, Legalizing the ASEAN Way: Adapting and Reimagining the ASEAN Investment Regime, 66 Am. J. Comp. L. 233 (2018

[1] Galati, L. (2023, September 27). What Is Cyber Espionage? Understanding State Sponsored Cyber Attacks. Cyberteam. https://www.cyberteam.us/blog/what-is-cyber-espionage-understanding-state-sponsored-cyber-attacks

[2] Alvarez, J. (2015, February 3). Stuxnet: The world's first cyber weapon. Stanford.edu. https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/news/stuxnet

[3] Wolter, D. (n.d.). The UN Takes a Big Step Forward on Cybersecurity. Arms Control Association. https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2013-09/un-takes-big-step-forward-cybersecurity

[4] (n.d.). The Budapest Convention (ETS No. 185) and its Protocols. Www.coe.int. https://www.coe.int/en/web/cybercrime/the-budapest-convention

[5] (n.d.). 2015 United States–China Cybersecurity Agreement. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_States%E2%80%93China_Cybersecurity_Agreement

[6] Rollins, J. W. (2015, October 16). U.S.–China Cyber Agreement. CRS INSIGHT. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/IN10376.pdf

[7] (2020, May 28). Understanding the EU's approach to cyber diplomacy and cyber defence. Think Tank. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI%282020%29651937

[8] Miadzvetskaya, Yuliya and Wessel, Ramses A., The Externalisation of the EU’s Cybersecurity Regime: The Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox (July 21, 2022). 7(1) European Papers 2022, University of Groningen Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 27/2022, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4199627

[9] (n.d.). Defending the networks The NATO Policy on Cyber Defence. NATO OTAN. https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2018/10/NATO-110608-CyberdefencePolicyExecSummary.pdf

[11] (n.d.). TALLINN Manual on the international law applicable to cyber warfare. Www.Penncerl.org. https://www.penncerl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/6481-tallinn-manual-on-the-international-law-applicable.pdf

[12] Williams, J. (2020, December 15). What You Need to Know About the SolarWinds Supply-Chain Attack. Sans.org. https://www.sans.org/blog/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-solarwinds-supply-chain-attack/

[13] (n.d.). The SolarWinds Cyber-Attack: What You Need to Know. Centre for Internet Security. https://www.cisecurity.org/solarwinds

[14] V. (2023, November 27). Email breach chronicles: The NotPetya catastrophe - global havoc in 2017. Zoho.com. https://www.zoho.com/workplace/articles/workplace/articles/notpetya-cyberattack.html

[1] Lok Sabha, F. (2012). STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (2011-12) THE DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL, 2010 FORTY-NINTH REPORT LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI (Saka) 2 FORTY-NINTH REPORT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (2011-2012) (FIFTEENTH LOK SABHA) THE DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL.

[6] Dr. Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution of India, 1683 (14^th Ed. 2009).

[7] Dr. Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution of India, 1683 (14^th Ed. 2009).

[8] Lok Sabha, F. (2012). STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (2011-12) THE DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL, 2010 FORTY-NINTH REPORT LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI (Saka) 2 FORTY-NINTH REPORT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (2011-2012) (FIFTEENTH LOK SABHA) THE DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL.

[10] Vol. III, (New Delhi, India, 1953-54), 181-330.

[15] McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO, (1985) 3 SCC 230 : AIR 1986 SC 649.

[16] See Nani Palkhivala et al., The Law and Practice of Income Tax 66 (9th Edn., Dinesh Vyas Ed., 2004)(hereinafter “Palkhivala”).

[17] Vodafone International Holdings v. Union of India, 2008 SCC OnLine Bom 1152 : (2009) 311 ITR 46.

[18] Rao, K. R. and Chakraborty, P. 2010. Goods and services tax in India : An Assessment

of the Base, Economic & Political Weekly, XLV (1), January 2.

[19] Rao, M., Rao, G. and Rao, K. R. 2009. Direct taxes code : Need for greater reflection,

Economic & Political Weekly, XLIV( 37), September

[20] Shetty, S.L. 2010. Mare tax concessions for more inequality, Economic & Political

Weekly, 2010 XLV (11).,March 1

[21] Shetty, S.L. 2010. Mare tax concessions for more inequality, Economic & Political

Weekly, 2010 XLV (11).,March 1

[22] Rao, M., Rao, G. and Rao, K. R. 2009. Direct taxes code : Need for greater reflection,

Economic & Political Weekly, XLIV( 37), September.

[23] The Indian Journal of Commerce Vol. 64, No. 2, April-June 2011.

[1] Huntington v. Attrill, 1892 SCC OnLine US SC 245 : 36 L Ed 1123 : 146 US 657 (1892), 667.

[2] Kokesh v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2017 SCC OnLine US SC 58 : 581 US ___ (2017).

[3] SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co., 401 F 2d 833 (1968).

[4] Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745 (2002).

[5] Barbara Black, Should the SEC Be a Collection Agency for Defrauded Investors? 63 THE BUSINESS LAWYER, 317-346 (Feb., 2008). Barbara Black, Should the SEC Be a Collection Agency for Defrauded Investors? 63 THE BUSINESS LAWYER, 317-346 (Feb., 2008).

[6] The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, No. 15, Acts of Parliament, 1992

[7] Rakesh Agrawal v. SEBI, 2003 SCC OnLine SAT 38 : (2004) 49 SCL 351.

[8] Id. at ¶77 (Quoting Securities and Exchange Commission v. Maurice Rind, 991 F 2d 1486 (9th Cir 1993)); see Videocon International Ltd. v. SEBI, (2015) 4 SCC 33.

[9] SAT followed the earlier cases of SEC v. Maurice Rind, 991 F 2d 1486 (9th Cir 1993); SEC v. Manor Nursing Centers Inc., 458 F 2d 1082 (2nd Cir 1972); Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. v. SEBI, 2001 SCC OnLine SAT 28; BPL Ltd. v. SEBI, 2001 SCC OnLine SAT 40; Videocon International Ltd. v. SEBI, Id.

[10] Ritesh Agarwal v. SEBI, (2008) 8 SCC 205, at ¶27.

[11] Roopalben N. Panchal, In re, 2011 SCC OnLine SEBI 33, at ¶9d.

[12] Dushyant N. Dalal v. SEBI, (2017) 9 SCC 660.

[14] The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Act, 2014, No. 27, Acts of Parliament, 2014.

[16] Ram Kishori Gupta v. SEBI, 2019 SCC OnLine SAT 149.

[18] THE BOARDOFTHE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONOF SECURITIES COMMISSIONS, PRINCIPLESFOR FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS(2013).

[21] M.S. Sahoo, Historical Perspective of Securities Laws. CHARTERED SEC'Y (2000).

[22] INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONOF SECURITIES COMMISSIONS, OBJECTIVESAND PRINCIPLESOF SECURITIES REGULATION(2003).

[23] The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Act, 1995, No. 5, Acts of Parliament, 1995.

[25]The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Act, 2002, No. 59, Acts of Parliament, 2002

[26] ET Bureau, CAG pulls up 5 watchdogs for keeping fee out of govt accounts, THE ECONOMIC TIMES (Mar. 19, 2011, 12:49 AM).

[27] Indian Contract Act, 1872, No. 9, Acts of Parliament, 1872.

[28] ANNA PAYNE & MONIQUE LEAHY, RESTITUTIONAND IMPLIED CONTRACTS, 66AM. JUR.2D §6 (Thomson Reuters, 2001).

[29] Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. v. SEBI, 2008 SCC OnLine SAT 74, at ¶5.

[31] Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. v. SEBI, supra note 32, at ¶7.

[32] Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. v. SEBI, 2007 SCC OnLine SAT 2, at ¶18.

[33] IPO Irregularities-Dealings by Mr. Deepak Kumar Shantilal Jain in The Initial Public Offering of Infrastructure Development Finance Co. Ltd., In re, 2008 SCC OnLine SEBI 176, at ¶13.

[34] Sumeet Industries Ltd. v. SEBI, 2016 SCC OnLine SAT 289.

[35] Palem Srikanth Reddy, In re, 2016 SCC OnLine SEBI 42, at ¶12.

[36] National Stock Exchange of India Ltd., In re, 2019 SCC OnLine SEBI 120, at ¶8.3.3.9.

[37] OPG Securities (P) Ltd., In re, 2019 SCC OnLine SEBI 116.

[38] In National Stock Exchange of India Ltd., In re, supra note 38, at ¶10.2.

[39] In ICICI Bank Ltd., In re, 2016 SCC OnLine SEBI 19, at ¶24.

[40] Trojan and Co. v. N.N. Nagappa Chettiar, AIR 1953 SC 235 : 1953 SCR 789.

[42] Ramkishori Gupta v. SEBI, 2013 SCC OnLine SAT 17 : [2013] SAT 52.

[43] In re Jay Bharat Fabrics Mills Ltd., SEBI Order No.AS/AO-03/2014 (2014), https://www.sebi.gov.in/sebi_data/attachdocs/1393913697715.pdf (last visited May 18, 2020).

[44] Sumeet Industries Ltd., In re, 2014 SCC OnLine SEBI 278.

[47] Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi, (2012) 13 SCC 61, at ¶22.

[48] N. Narayanan v. Adjudicating Officer, supra note 19.

[49] R.K. Agarwal v. SEBI, 2001 SCC OnLine SAT 15 : 2001 SAT 15.

[1] Dr. Gagan Deep Kour, Assistant Professor, School of Law, Bennett University

[2] William Lovejoy, Bargaining Chains,56 Management Science, 2282, 2291(2010)

[3] Gordon Mills, Buyer Power of Supermarkets, 10 Agenda, 145 (2003)

[5] Inderst & C.Wey, Countervailing Power And Dynamic Efficiency, 9 Journal of the European Economic Association, 702, 703(2011).

[6] Zhiqi Chen; “Defining buyer power”, 53 Antitrust Bulletin, 241, 242(2008).

[7] W. Kip Viscusi, Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., & John M. Vernon; “Economics of Regulation and Antitrust”; 2005 at 294.

[8] Roger G. Noll; “Buyer Power and Economic Policy”, 72 Antitrust Law J. 589; 2005.

[10] Abir Roy, Competition Law in India (2008) at 150.

[11]Franck Latremoiere, Countervailing buyer power and buyer market power, Reckon Open, June 2005; retrieved from http://www.reckon.co.uk/headlines-franckblog.

[12] Chloe Binet, “Buyer Power in EU Competition Law A boon or impediment to consumer welfare?”, Université Catholique de Louvain, 2014

[13] R.Inderst & G.Shaffer, Buyer power in merger control; Antitrust Handbook: Issues in competition law and policy; 2007, Chapter XX, at 18.

[14] In this scenario, it is assumed that lower prices negotiated upstream are passed on to consumers

[15]John B. Kirkwood, Powerful Buyers And Merger Enforcement, 92 Boston University Law Rev. 1485, 1550(2012)

[16] Commission’s decision of 20 November 1996, Case IV/M.784.

[17] Spiral effect refers to continuous strengthening of a firm. If the size of a merged firm is bigger, it would lead to a larger volume-related discount. This would enable such firm to undercut prices offered by its rivals and offer lower prices. This would eventually increase its market share. A greater market share would in turn raise the degree of its purchases, which would increase its buyer power, and it will go on in this manner.

[18] Lars-Hendrik Roller;“Buyer Power in the EU” ; American Antitrust Institute Conference on “Buyer Power and Antitrust”; June 2004; retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/competition/economist/buyer_power.

[19] COMMISSION DECISION of 3 February 1999;Case No IV/M.1221

[21] OECD Policy discussion on Monopsony and Buyer Power; 2008; retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/44445750.

[22] Hanns Peter Nehl, Branchenuntersuchung Lebensmittelhandel -The Austrian competition authority concludes inquiry in food distribution sector highlighting indications of strong buyer power ;Concurrences Antitrust Publications, June 2007; retrieved from https://www.concurrences.com/en/bulletin/news-issues/june-2007/The-Austrian-competition-authority-13981.

[23] Two largest retail groups had a combined market share of 57% in 2005

[24] Lucio Tome Feteira; Insights on Superior Bargaining Power; 64 International Competition Law Series 251.

[25] The supply of groceries in the UK market investigation; 30-04-2008; retrieved from http://www.ias.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Price%20docs/538.pdf

[26] The supply of groceries in the UK market investigation; 30-04-2008; Para 41; retrieved from http://www.ias.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Price%20docs/538.pdf.

[29] It varies between 82-90 per cent depending on the country.

[1] Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, SRM University, Delhi -NCR and Research Scholar, Vellore Institute of Technology School of Law (VITSOL), Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

[2] Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, SRM University, Delhi -NCR

[3] C.H. Mcilwain, Constitutionalism: Ancient and Modern 21 (McIlwain [1940] 2008); S.A. De Smith, Constitutional and Administrative Law 34 (De Smith 1977).

[4] M.J.C. Vile, Constitutionalism and The Separation Powers 2 (2nd ed., Vile 1967).

[5] See State of Karnataka v. Dr. Praveen Bhai Thogadia, A.I.R. 2004 S.C. 2081.

[6] M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law 6 (5th ed., Jain 2007).

[7] See generally, Bruce Ackerman, Revolutionary Constitutions: Charismatic Leadership and The Rule Of Law (Ackerman 2019).

[8] D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution of India 17 (14th ed., 2011); see also M. Nagraj v. Union of India, A.I.R. 2007 S.C. 71.

[9] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 597.

[10] Keshavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 146; BASU, supra note 10, at 629. See also Union of India v. Hindustan Development Cooperation, A.I.R. 1994 S.C. 988.

[11] State of Kerala v. Thomas, A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 496; Mehta v. Union of India, (1992) Supp. (2) S.C.C. 85.

[12] Constitution of India, Article 37, provides: “The provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any Court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in governance of the Country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making the laws”.

[13] Constitution of India, Article 41, provides: “The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective provision for securing the . . . . right to education . . . . . . ”.

[14] Constitution of India, Article 45, provides: “The State shall endeavor to provide early childhood care and education for children until they complete the age of six”.

[15] Constitution of India, Article 46, provides: “The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people . . . ”.

[16] Constitution of India, Article 21-A, provides: “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine”

[17] On the important role played by judicial interpretation in the development of constitutionalism, see Robert M. Cover, Nomos and Narrative, 97 HARV. L. REV. 4 (Cover 1983); John V. Orth, John Gava, Arvind P. Bhanu, and Paul T. Babie, No Amendment? No Problem: Judges, “Informal Amendment,” and the Evolution of Constitutional Meaning in the Federal Democracies of Australia, Canada, India, and the United States, 48 PEPP. L. REV. 341 (Orth et al. 2021).

[18] A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, A.I.R. 1950 S.C. 27

[19] Constitution of India, Article 21, provides: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”

[20] Constitution of India, Article 14, provides: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”

[21] Constitution of India, Article 19, provides: “(1) All citizens shall have the right—(a) to freedom of speech and expression; (b) to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) to form associations or unions 2 [or co-operative societies]; (d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; (e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; 3 [and] (g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.”

[22] Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

[23] Constitution of India, Preamble, establishes justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity, including social, economic and political justice, as the goals of the Constitution. See P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 2005 S.C. 3226

[1] Microsoft v. Motorola, 2013 WL 2111217 (“Microsoft case”)

[2] Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp, 318 F. Supp. 1116

[3] Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, 921 F. Supp. 2d 903 (N.D. Ill. 2013)

[1] Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2013) 10 SC CK 0067

[2] Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India 2018 INSC 790

[3] S Khushboo vs Kanniammal & Anr AIR 2010 SC 3196

[4] Sidra Mehboob Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra 2021 SCC Online Bom 1839

[5] Siddhi Vishwanath Shelar v. State of Maharashtra 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 11672

[6] Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (49 of 2016)

[8] Siddhi Vishwanath Shelar v State of Maharashtra 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 11672

[9] Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

[10] Suchita Srivastava vs. Chandigarh Administration (2009) 9 SCC 1

[11] Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

[12] Francis Coralie Mullin vs The Administrator, Union 1981 SCR (2) 516

[13] Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

[1] Phd. Scholar, Department Of Laws, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab.

[2] Assistant Professor, Department Of Laws, Maharishi Markandeshwar (Deemed To be University), Mullana, Ambala.

[3] X v X (2022) SCC OnLine Mad 4609, decided on 16.09.2022.

[4] Cydni, ‘Parental Alienation - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes’ (Legal Dictionary, 8 January 2017) <https://legaldictionary.net/parental-alienation> accessed 20 March 2024.

[5] ‘Custody Special Circumstances: Supervised or Interstate Visits, etc.’ (Custody X Change: The Trusted Software for Parenting Schedules) <www.custodyxchange.com/topics/custody/special-circumstances/parental-alienation.ph> accessed 20 March 2024.

[8] Ken Lewis, ‘Parental Alienation Can Be Emotional Child Abuse’ (NCSC) <www.ncsc.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/42152/parental_alienation_Lewis.pdf> accessed 20 March 2024.

[9] Traci Pedersen, ‘Narcissistic Parental Alienation: Signs, Causes, and Tips’ (Psych Central, 22 June 2016) <https://psychcentral.com/disorders/children-with-narcissistic-parental-alienation-syndrome#warning-signs> accessed 20 March 2024.

[10] Bootie, ‘Brazil: Parental Alienation defined in Law -’ (Lawyer in Brazil, 2 September 2010) <www.lawyerinbrazil.com/brazil-parental-alienation/> accessed 15 March 2024.

[11] ‘Brazil: New Law Modifies Measures to Be Taken Against Parental Alienation’ (The Library of Congress) <www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2022-07-04/brazil-new-law-modifies-measures-to-be-taken-against-parental-alienation/> accessed 22 March 2024.

[12] Heidi Barter, ‘Parental Alienation and Laws Applicable in South Africa: A Comprehensive Guide - Law Firm - Barter McKellar’ (Barter McKellar) <www.bartermckellar.law/family-law-explained/parental-alienation-and-laws-applicable-in-south-africa-a-comprehensive-guide> accessed 15 March 2024.

[14] Terrence White, ‘Parental alienation and the United Nations: is gender politics getting in the way of children’s wellbeing? — The Centre for Male Psychology’ (The Centre for Male Psychology) <www.centreformalepsychology.com/male-psychology-magazine-listings/parental-alienation-and-the-united-nations-is-gender-politics-getting-in-the-way-of-childrens-wellbeing> accessed 20 March 2024.

[21] Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956, s 6.

[22] Paras Diwan, Law of Adoption, Minority, Guardianship And Custody (Universal Law Publishing Co. 2012) 16.

[24] Sheila B. Das v P.R. Sugasree (2006) 3 SCC 62.

[26] Vivek Singh v Romani Singh AIR (2017) SC 929.

[28] X v X (2022) SCC OnLine Mad 4609, decided on 16.09.2022.

[29] ABC v XYZ (2023) SCC OnLine Del 6099, decided on 13-09-2023.

[30] ‘Parental Alienation from father who never showed any neglect is an extreme act of mental cruelty: Delhi High Court upholds divorce’ (SCC Times, 1 October 2023) <www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/10/01/delhi-hc-alienation-of-the-child-from-his-father-is-an-extreme-act-of-mental-cruelty-legal-news/> accessed 30 March 2024.

[32] Gaurav Nagpal v Sumedha Nagpal (2009) 1 SCC 42.

[33] Lahari Sakhamuri v Sobhan Kodali (2019) 7 SCC 311.

IJLRA	N. Raj Kumar ; Kamble Shivadayal . "Design of Fault Tolerance Parallel FFT’s Using Xilinx 14.5v" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals Volume 5 Issue 8 2022 Page 1-6
IEEE	N. Raj Kumar ; Kamble Shivadayal . "Design of Fault Tolerance Parallel FFT’s Using Xilinx 14.5v" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, 5(8)

RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN INDIA: EXPLAINED HORIZONTALLY BY - PRIYANSH KANAWAT

SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW IP INJECTION CAN INCREASE THE FRUITFULNESS OF AEC AND ITS GOAL OF 2025 BY - ABHISHEK SHARMA, ANNANY MAMGAIN & ARYAN GARG

UNDERSTANDING CYBER ESPIONAGE AND STATE-SPONSORED ATTACKS BY - DEEPANSHI SRIVASTAVA

AN OVERVIEW OF DIRECT TAXES CODE BILL BY- AYUSH PATIDAR & SNEHA SHARMA

CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON THE GAP IN SEBI DISGORGEMENT ORDERS: SAFEGUARDING THE INTERESTS OF AFFECTED INVESTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS BY- AYUSH PATIDAR

ASSESSMENT OF BUYER POWER IN COMPETITION LAW: A BOON OR A THREAT BY - DR. GAGAN DEEP KOUR

CONSTITUTIONALISM VIS-À-VIS CONSTITUTION: EVOLUTION AND UTILITY IN MODERN DEMOCRATIC INDIA BY - MOHAMMAD SALEEM & RAKA MEDHAVI

CASE ANALYSIS ON IN RE INNOVATIO IP VENTURES, LLC PATENT LITIGATION BY: SAKSHI AGRAWAL & SATYAM SINGH

CASE COMMENTARY ON X VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. BY: JOSNA ANN BINO & JENNY ROSE PG

NAVIGATING THE INTERWEAVING LEGAL THREADS OF PARENTAL ALIENATION, BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD AND PARENTAL RIGHTS: A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF CHILD CUSTODY LAWS IN INDIA BY - KARISHMA JAIN & AANCHAL

LAW JOURNAL

IMPORTANT LINKS

ETHICS & POLICY

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation

Citation 2