Insurance companies exhort bread-winners of families to take out policies to protect their families. When a person takes out a policy, he has his wife and children or perhaps his old parents in mind and makes nomination in the firm belief that the nominee will get the money in the event of his untimely death. Now the court says no, the money will go to the successor, even if he or she is a well-to-do person. Judges should not become law-makers.
Nominations, especially for co-operative society flats are being practiced almost for a century or more. The flats are also held by nominees and transferred further and further. Now suddenly the court comes and lays down new law pulling the carpet from under the feet.. In the Indrani Wahi case also actually the Supreme Court was non-committal.
I refer to the query of Mr Atul. and comment on the basis of the limited information available. The principle behind Sec 65B certification is that when there is an electronic document for which a person has access and it has to be produced as evidence for admissibility, any person who has access can take a "Computer Output" of the electronic document and certify it with the necessary statements. Even if the electronic document was actually issued by some body else, the certificated computer output is admissible without the production of the original. There are other instances when a computer is used for taking a print out of an electronic document by the same person or authority which created the electronic document. In such instance, the computer is a tool and printing out is an activity of the computer user. This is a computer print out of the person's own electronic document and it can be signed just like any other letter. It does not require Sec 65B clauses. If therefore the company is issuing a letter stating that acccoring to our company's loan account, the outstanding is so much...and this is signed by the loan officer, then Sec 65B certificate may not be required. However, if the certificate is issued by a person who is viewing the loan ledger but he himself is not the person who is accountable for the accuracy of the account, it would be preferable for him to provide a sec 65B certificate stating that according to our company's computer records, there exits an electronic record (statement of balance) and the copy is available here as computer output... etc.
Anyone may not be obliged to bother self (ves) to go into and consider independently the reasons given why a 'plc' is a better choice , in comparison to a 'llp'. Further, that is a decision to be taken , upfront, by the group of persons - business men or professionals, intimately concerned; required to be done, taking into account, depending upon the size of the legal entity , in mind, to be formed, the peculiarities of the type of venture, in contemplation, from all angles (not barring the tax angle). Be that as it may, some of the aspects highlighted/brought to focus, in a couple of articles - notwithstanding that was, at a point in time before the 'llp' concept was gone ahead with and finally given the shape as brought in on the statute book,- may be usefully referred to, even now. Citation: (2005) 128 Comp. Cas pg 1; and (2006) 65 SCL pg. 42.