CLICK here for SC verdict on SASIKALA and others

Thursday, 14 May 2015

ERROR at initial amendment

You can check this error even if added more and more non acceptable items of INCOME or ASSET value reduction which mentioned by ADMK lawyers the calculation never go below the permissible limit 10% for this Himalayan error of MATHS on Jaya verdict Instead it has come out somewhere between 17% to 106%. This article clearly explains each and every possibility considering various permutations and combinations of OFFSETTING neutral and reasonable justification the percentage DA value never go below 10%

Read more and get a clear cut picture of GRAVE error of this Hon'ble Justice Kumaarasaamy

There are FOUR major errors analysed in this site using simple arithmetic. All comments are welcome. Please click the relevant links right side bar  for elaborate study on the ANALYSIS of errors in JAYA VERDICT.


How DA came to account for less than 10% of income

  • Vigilance probe’s findings:
    Construction costs: Rs.27,79,88, 945
    Marriage expenses: Rs.6,25,04,222
  • High Court’s findings: Construction costs: Rs.5,10,54,060 
    Marriage expenses: Rs.28,68,000
  • Exaggerated value:
    Construction costs: Rs.2,69,34,885
    Marriage expenses: Rs.6,16,36,222
  • Total assets:
    Vigilance estimate - Exaggerated value
    Rs. 37,59,02,466
  • Disproportionate assets: Total assets - Total income
  • Rs.37,59,02,466-Rs.34,76,65,654 = Rs.2,82,36,812
  • Rs.2,82,36,812 x 100/Rs.34,76,65,654= 8.12%