(Prafulla Pathak)

Amity Law School, Delhi (affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University) is all set to host the 18th edition of its National Moot Court Competition from Friday, 8th March to Sunday, 10th March 2019.

You can access the Moot Problem here.

The teams battling it out for the top laurels this year are-

1. SVKM Narsee Monji

2. Maharashtra National Law University, Nagpur

3. Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad

4. Institute of Law, Nirma University

5. Symbiosis Law School, Pune

6. Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda

7. National Law University, Jodhpur

8. Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar

9. Government Law College, Mumbai

10. School of Legla Studies, Rewa University

11. Bennett University

12. IMS Law College, Pune

13. Law School, Jammu University

14. Lloyd Law College

15. Christ University, Bangalore

16. National University of Juridical Sciences, West Bengal

17. NLIU, Bhopal

18. Law College, Dehradun

19. Jamia Milia Islamia University

20. DSNLU

21. Amity Law School, Amity University, Noida

22. The Northcap University, Gurugram

23. JEMTEC, School of Law

24. Kurukshetra University

 

The event shall officially begin on 8th March with Team Registratons begining at 3:00 PM. Memorial exchange is scheduled at 4:00 PM after which the researchers will have to gear up for the researcher's test. On 09th March, after the preliminary rounds the Top 8 teams shall then proceed to the Quarter-Finals. The Semi-Finals and the Finals will be held on 10th March. 

We promise to keep you posted with the latest deets here starting on 8th March. So, stay tuned! You can also follow us on our Facebook page here.

See you on 8th, folks!

 -------

 We heartily thank our sponsors who have contributed generously to turn our efforts of the 18th Amity National Moot Court Competition into reality.

- Pahuja Law Academy Private Limited

- Sierra Appliances Private  Limited 

- Legal Education Awareness Foundation

- Ralli and Assosiates 

- Ashna Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

- Mr. Amarjit Singh Chandiok

- Mother Dairy

- Frootle

- Rustrom Legal

- B Natural by ITC

--------

Day 1- Registrations and Researcher's Test

Your bloggers for the day are Kunal Surhatia, Teerth Waraich and Prafulla Pathak.

2:50 PM

Hi everyone! The preparations for 18th ANMCC are in full swing. The venue committee has put in a lot of effort to set things up. Registration desks have been set up. Registrations will begin at 3:00 PM sharp. We'll keep updating you. Have a great ANMCC!

3:00 PM

We have started with registrations. Teams are lining up to get themselves registered. Memorial Exchange will begin at 4:00 PM and will be followed by Researcher's test.

4:20 PM

Draw of lots to decide matchups for Prelims is underway and memorial exchange is expected to begin shortly.

4:30 PM

Researcher's test has commenced and is currently in progress.

5:30 PM

Researcher's test concludes. Break for High Tea.

6:00 PM

Hello everyone! That's all for today. Live reporting begins tomorrow with commencement of first Preliminary round at 10:00 AM. Best wishes to the teams battling it out tomorrow. Have a good night, folks!

-------

 

Day-2  Preliminary Rounds and Quarter Finals

8:30 AM

Good Morning folks! It's a beautiful morning in Delhi. Volunteers have started arriving and have started with setting things up. Your bloggers for the day are Tanya Patwal, Subha Chugh and Kunal Surhatia.

9:00 AM

Participants have arrived and have started with their mock sessions. The judges will arive by 9:30 and the briefing with begin shortly after.

9:50 AM

All the judges have arrived and they are being briefed right now. The prelims will be commencing shortly.

10:30 AM

Participants have arrived in their respective courtrooms. Matchups will begin shortly.

10:35 AM

Courtroom 6-

The Petitioner has asked permission to begin and has been granted the same.

Courtroom 11-

The Judges are going through their memorials. Air of calm and excitement in the room.

Courtroom 7-

The Judges ask the Petitioner to present the brief facts of the case cited.

10:40 AM

Courtroom 5-

First speaker of the Petitioner is anwering the questions put forth by the Judges satisfactorily. Judges ask the Petitoner whether they should hear the arguments or leave the Courtroom.

10:43 AM

Courtroom 2-

The Judges direct Petitioner to read the cited Section again and explain it to them.

Courtroom 10-

The curious case of the missing Judges continues.

Courtroom 4-

The Petitioner is not able to satisfy the Judges during questioning and seeks apology for the same.

10:50 PM

Courtroom 2-

The Petitioner fails to convince the Judges with the arguments put forth. Awkward silence prevails.

Courtroom 9-

The appellants laughed on a comment by the Judges to the Petitioners and are now being scolded for the same.

10:53 AM

Courtroom 3-

The Judges don't seem happy with the first speaker of Petitioners and ask her to summarise the arguments in two minutes.

Courtroom 6-

Second speaker of Petitioners approaches the podium. She's being faced by the same dilemma of representation and the Judges are trying to point out that the Petitoners are representing the wrong party.

10:58 AM

Courtroom 3-

One of the Judges is throwing counter to every arguement while the other one is silently observing.

Courtroom 12-

Second speaker of the Petitioner proceeds to the podium and Judges ask her to limit the time of arguments beforehand.

11:00 AM

Courtroom 9-

Petitioners are done with their arguments. FIrst speaker of Respondents approaches the podium.

Courtroom 6- 

Keeping on with the spirit of Women's Day, Petitioners are referring to the bench as 'your ladyship'.

Courtroom 10-

The Judges seem unimpressed with the contention put forth by the Petitioner and ask him to move on to the next issue.

Courtroom 7-

The second counsel for the Petitioner is being asked to address the shortcomings of her co-counsel, which she is not able to anwer with clarity.

11:18 AM

Courtroom 6-

The Judges want to know if the respondent is trying to say that lack of confidence on behalf of the petitioners ground enough for the Judges to dismiss their arguments.

Courtroom 8-

After a few questions the defendant has concluded the arguements. Second speaker approaches the podium amd is now setting up her papers.

11:28 AM

Courtroom 3-

First speaker of Respondents is arguing in flow. Seems like he's reciting a poem. Judges are smiling.

Courtroom 4-

THe Judges seem satisfied with the arguments presented by the second speaker of the respondents.

11:45 AM

Courtroom 12-

Second speaker of Respondents now proceeds with arguments. 

11:50 AM

Courtroom 3-

Respondent seems crystal clear with the arguments. He's stocked up with various case laws. Petitioners seem a bit nervous.

Courtroom 6-

Matchup is done with. Judges have asked the occupants to step out. Paticipants are waiting for feedback.

Courtroom 3-

Respondent confidently answers all the questions put up by the Judges related to her issues. The Judges seem satisfied with the answers.

12:02 PM

Courtroom 5-

Second speaker of the respondents now moves on to the prayer.

12:05 PM

Round one of Preliminary Matchups is over in most of the courtrooms. Teams are awaiting the feedback session.

12:40 PM

We have started with the Second Preliminary round. Most of the Courtrooms are in thick with the arguments.

Courtroom 6-

First speaker of Petitioners has statred with the arguments. He admits that he's a bit confused, the Judges ask him to settle down and then proceed.

Courtroom 11-

The participants are whispering among themselves and the Petitioners seem worried about the lost highlighter.

12:45 PM

Courtroom 12-

Judges seem a little confused with the submissions of the Petitioners. First speaker of Petitioners seems to be caught in a volley of questions.

12:52 PM

Courtroom 2-

The Petitioner has exhausted the time on first issue itself. The Judges ask him to summarise the second issue.

Courtrom 6-

The Judges have asked the speaker to proceed to the next issue, which has caught the speaker a little off guard and he's trying to gain his footing, colluding with his researcher, which has irked the judges.

12:58 PM

Courtroom 7-

The Judges seem unhappy with the petitioners as they cite "the internet" and "some books" as their reference.

Courtroom 8-

Time's up for the first speaker of Petitioners. The Judges are still seeking clarification on her arguments.

01:07 PM

Courtroom 6-

The Petitioner is in a flurry of apologies and the Judges are not pleased. They have, however, asked her to proceed.

Courtroom 7-

Second speaker of the petitioners is caught by surprise after the Judges ask her to explain the facts. She seems unclear about them.

Courtroom 3-

The Judges ask the first speaker of Petitioners to sit down and direct the second speaker to approach the podium.

01:15 PM

Courtroom 10-

The Judges are now questioning the speaker on a certain issue. The speaker seems to be drifting away from the questions.

1:20 PM

Courtroom 11-

Second speaker of the Petitoners sum up his arguments. First speaker of the Respondents has commenced his arguments.

Courtroom 7-

Judges seem annoyed by the vagueness of the arguments of the Petitoners. The Judges ask the respondents to begin their oral submission.

Courtroom 5-

Unimpressed with the lack of answers to their questions, the judges have now asked the first speaker to wrap up quickly. Second speaker has taken over.

01:30 PM

Courtroom 3-

First speaker of the respondents has now started with the arguments. Judges are on a questioning spree as soon as he begins. 

01:40 PM

Courtroom 1-

Respondents seem well versed with their arguments. The Judges are impressed.

Courtroom 3-

The Respondents don't seem well versed with the facts and is looping around the same point. The Judges seem a bit annoyed.

01:55 PM

Courtroom 7-

Arguments on both sides conclude.Time given for rebuttals. The petitioners say they have no rebuttals to put forth.

02:05 PM

Matchups are over in most of the courtrooms. Feedback session is in progress.

 02:35 PM

(Prafulla)

Hello folks! The results have been declared and the teams that have stormed into the Quarters, in particular order-

1. GNLU

2. NLU, Jodhpur

3. Institute of Law, Nirma University

4. WBNUJS

5. Christ University

6. Symbiosis, Pune

7. SVKM Narsee Monjee

8. NLIU, Bhopal

Live blogging shall resume with the commencement of Quarters at 3:30 PM.

 

Quarter Finals

3:30 PM

Courtroom 4-

The judges have announced the matchup to commence. Speaker 1 for the Petitioners is on the podium.

Courtroom 2- 

The judges have arrived and are going through the teams' memos.

Courtroom 4-

The judges have asked the speaker to inform the bench which issues will be dealt by which speaker.

Courtroom 1-

The judges have arrived and are settling down. The match shall commence shortly.

Courtroom 4-

The judge tries to lay a subtle trap by questioning him on his present arguments. The speaker cleverly responds to the question, impressing the judges. 

Courtroom 2-

The judges have asked Speaker 1 for the Petitioners to brief them about the issues and commence with the arguments.

3:45 PM

Courtroom 2-

The Speaker 1 for Petitoners is responding to the questions posed by the judges very confidently but he hasn't mentioned anything about the core issue.

Courtroom 4-

The judges are grilling the petitioners with a series of questions, meticulously checking each citation in the memo, perhaps trying to make the speaker nervous. She is however facing each question with confidence and holding her ground.

Courtroom 2-

The Counsel for Petitioners is being questioned about the core issue and the counsel is looking in the Bare Act of the Constitution to answer but taking up a lot of time. 

 3:50 PM

Courtroom 4-

The Speaker seems to be smart, catching on to the judges' questions even before they are framed, ready with an answer without faltering.

Courtroom 3- 

Judges have arrived and are going through the teams' memorandums.

4:05 PM

Courtroom 1-

Speaker 1 for the Petitioners has moved to the podium and begun with his arguments.

Courtroom 3-

The judge is questioning as to how the Petitioners and Respondents would like to proceed. The Petitioner has decided to move first and their Speaker 1 is on the podium. The judges are trying to lighten up the tension in the room.

4:15 PM

Courtroom 2-

The Speaker 1 for the Petitioners is being grilled by the judges regarding the arguments made by him by throwing some light on the mistakes made by him. 

Courtroom 1-

The judges are asking the Petitioner if they can make certain submissions that they have mentioned in their memorials.

Courtroom 3-

The Speaker has started to present her issues and is being heavily cross-questioned by the judges. There is an error in the memorial submitted by them for which the Petitioner begs the judges to pardon the mistake.

Courtroom 2-

The judges are asking Petitioner to justify relevant submissions to satisfy the present case.

4:20 PM

Courtroom 4- 

The judges are giving the Petitioners an opening to argue a new line. It is a gamble and whether the Speaker grasps the opportunity to impress the judges remains to be seen.

Courtroom 2-

The Petitioner tries to explain his good faith in the issue and has now jumped to the second issue in his submission.

Courtroom 1-

The judges have come to believe that the Speaker has come unprepared and is not well-versed with the facts and general proceedings of his submissions.

Courtroom 3- 

The judges are questioning the speaker on important issues.

4:25 PM

Courtroom 2-

The judges are constantly grilling the speaker, trying to catch him off-guard but the speaker is answering each and every question with confidence that seems to satisfy the judges.

Courtroom 4-

The judges have finally caught the speaker off-guard regarding filing of petitions. They have granted an extra minute to the Speaker to sum up the arguments since time has elapsed. 

4:35 PM

Courtroom 3-

The Speaker is unable to justify her arguments and answer the questions posed by the judges. The second speaker is at the podium, commencing with his arguments.

Courtroom 4-

Speaker 1 is off the podium and Speaker 2 for the Petitioner has started to present his arguments.

Courtroom 2-

The Speaker is repeating his arguments using different words and has been asked to conclude his statements.

4:40 PM

Courtroom 2-

Second speaker has started his arguments, presenting his arguments in a more confident and calm demeanour.

Courtroom 1-

Second speaker of Petitioners has started presenting the rest of the arguments.

4:42 PM

Courtroom 4-

The judges have asked the Petitioner to ditch the case laws and focus on the facts. The bombardment of questions by the judges on the speaker seems to be making him nervous.

Courtroom 2-

The judges are bombarding the speaker with constant questions and the speaker is able to satisfy them with exceptional answers.

4:48 PM

Courtroom 4- 

The Judges have asked the Petitioner to present their prayer. The speaker however is not heeding to their direction of not reading it out of the paper.

Courtroom 1-

The Respondents have started with their arguments. Speaker 1 is on the podium and is unable to satisfy the judges on the exceptions of defamation.

Courtroom 4-

The judges have asked for a moment before the respondent starts with their arguments.

4:50 PM

Courtroom 4- 

Respondent has begun with his arguments but is fumbling quite a bit and has admitted to being unsure about the facts.

Courtroom 3-

The judges seem to be unsatisfied with the petitioner as the latter won't be dealing with an important issue of this moot proposition.

Courtroom 2-

The judges are unsatisfied with the Petitioner being unclear about the problem and leaving certain important aspects of the issue. The judges have asked Speaker 2 for the Respondents to approach the podium to commence with his arguments.

Courtroom 4-

The Speaker 2 for the Respondents has taken over the arguments.

5:00 PM

Courtroom 1-

The counsel for Respondents has used the term 'miscarriage of justice' and is being grilled on the relevance of it in this moot proposition.

Courtroom 3-

The Speaker is trying to explain to the judges the draconian nature of law and the judges are trying to reason an alternate solution to the one proposed by the Respondents.

Courtroom 2-

The judges have cornered Speaker 2 for the Respondent with a barrage of questions which seems to have thrown her. However, after taking a few moments, she has handled the situation. She is now summarising her arguments point by point.

Courtroom 4-

The judges seem to be satisfied by the submissions by the Respondents. The judges threw an unpredictable question at the speaker which she answered with aplomb.

5:10 PM

Courtroom 1-

The Speaker 2 for the Respondents has taken over from his co-speaker.

Courtroom 4-

The judges have asked the respondent to answer their questions and sum up the arguments in under a minute.

Courtroom 2- 

The arguments by the Respondents are now complete. Rebuttals and surrebuttals are being entertained.

Courtroom 3-

The Speaker for the respondent has begun arguing and explaining to the judges what issue she shall be proceeding with. Her contentions make the judges giggle, earning her a remark of being 'sweet'.

5:15 PM

Courtroom 2-

The judges are trying to confuse the speaker but she is trying her level best to hold to her ground.

Courtroom 4-

The Petitioners are done with rebuttals. Respondents' speaker now moves to the dias for sur rebuttals.

5:25 PM

Courtroom 3-

Second speaker for the respondants has arrived at the podium and commenced with his arrguments.

5:35 PM

Courtroom 1-

The court has adjourned.

Courtroom 3-

Arguments are still underway in Courtroom 3. Second speaker of the Respondents is being bombarded with the questions.

5:50 PM

Courtroom 3-

Speakers are done with their arguments. Rebuttals are in progress.

6:05 PM

We're done with the Semi-finals. We'll update you with the results shortly.

06:35 PM

(Prafulla)

We're back with the results and the teams that have broken into the semis are, in no particular order-

1. Christ University, Bangalore

2. NLIU, Bhopal

3. Institute of Law, Nirma University

4. Symbiosis Law School, Pune

A hearty congratulations to the teams! We wish them the best for tomorrow.

We'll meet you tomorrow at 9:00 AM. Have a good night, folks!

-------

(Prafulla)

Day 3- Semi Finals, Finals and Valedictory Ceremony

9:00 AM

Good morning folks! We're all excited for Semis and Finals. Teams and the Judges shall be arriving shortly. Judges' orientation is scheduled at 10:00 AM and Semis shall commence at 10:30. We'll update you shortly.

Your bloggers for today are Kunal Surhatia and Niyush Kumar.

(Kunal and Niyush)

10:00 AM

The esteemed Judges have arrived and the briefing is underway.

10:30 AM

Hi folks! The matchups are about to begin. We are honoured to have Justice (Retd.) G. P Mittal and Dr. Manoj Kumar Sinha in Courtroom 1 and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sangita Dhingra and Prof. V. K. Ahuja in Courtroom 2.

Christ University is up against NLIU, Bhopal in Courtroom 1 and Institute of Law, Nirma University is up against Symbiosis Law School, Pune in Courtroom 2.

10:45 AM

Courtroom 2

First Speaker of Petitioners seeks permission to approach the dias.

Courtroom 1

First speaker of Petitioners seems visibly nervous. There seems some confusion between Petitioners and the Judges regarding the memorial.

10:55 AM

Courtroom 1-

Due to the misunderstanding regarding the Memorial, the Petitioners have pleaded that their time be reset. The Judges have granted the same.

Courtroom 2-

The first speaker of the petitioners have concluded with the first issue and is now moving on to the next issue.

11:00 AM

Courtroom 1-

The argument presented by the first speaker has been unquestioned so far but the speaker seems to be a little nervous, fumbling over her words.

Courtroom 2-

The judges are silent and has have not questioned the argument so far.

11:05 AM

Courtroom 1-

The posing of minimum questions seems to be making the speaker nervous.

Courtroom 2-

Second speaker for the petitioners steps to the podium to begin with their arguments.

 11:15 AM

Courtroom 1-

The speaker have regained his confidence and have started to explain his next issue point by point.

Courtroom 2-

The judge does not agree with the contention of second speaker of the petitioner and knocks down their interpretation.

11:25 AM

Courtroom 1-

Second speaker for the petitioners pauses, trying like her predecessor to stir up some action, but the judges maintain their silence.

Courtroom 2-

The Judges have launched a volley of questions. The Speaker is caught off guard but gathers her calm and puts forth her argument with ease.

11:30 Am

Courtroom 1- 

The Respondents are fervently shuffling through their documents trying to find points for rebuttals.

Courtroom 2-

Time's up for speaker of Petitioners. She seeks some extra time to which the Judges kindly agree.

11:35 AM

Courtroom 1-

The Judges appear to be almost as silent as the walls in the court room and the arguments seem more like a speech.

Courtroom 2-

The Respondent Counsel has commenced with their arguments.

11:40 AM

Courtroom 2-

The Judges seem unimpressed by the Counsel of the Respondents and questions their knowledge of the present case.

Courtroom 1-

The Judges seem to be satisfied with the arguments presented by the counsel of the petitioner, and the petitioners have moved to present their prayers.

 11:50 AM

Courtroom 2-

The Judge disagrees with the Respondent Speaker's contention and does not agree that the situation in the instant case is as grave as being portrayed by the Respondent

Courtroom 1-

The Judges maintain a steely and quiet demeanour as the Respondents continue their arguments.

 11:55 AM

Courtroom 2-

Second speaker for the Respondents approaches to the dias and proceeds with their arguments.

Courtroom 1-

The speaker for the Respondents moves on to the next issue, while the Judges still maintain the silence on the arguments.

12:00 PM 

Courtroom 1-

As the first speaker for the Respondents summarizes arguments, an unpredictable questions by the Judges has thrown the speaker of the tracks.

Courtroom 2-

The second speaker for the Respondents is going on confidently with her arguments without frequent interruptions by the Judges.

12:10 PM

Courtroom 1-

A sudden barrage of question by the Judges has caught the speaker off guard as she struggles to answer the questions.

Courtroom 2-

The second speaker had plead the Judges for extra time to summarise and conclude with her agruments.

12:25 PM

Courtroom 1-

The speaker for the petitioner have moved to the podium for rebbutals.

Courtroom 2-

Rebbutals and sur-Rebuttals have concluded. The court is adjourned.

12:30 PM

Courtroom 1-

The Respondents have raised for Sur-Rebbutals. The speaker, however, is fumbling over his words and seem to be nervous.

12:35 PM

We're done with the Semi Finals. We'll be back with the results in a short while.

(Prafulla)

1:20 PM

Hi Folks! We're back with the results. The teams breaking into the Finals are Symbiosis Law School, Pune & NLIU, Bhopal. Congratulations to both the teams and we wish them the best.

Finals are scheduled to begin at 2:00 PM. Live updates will resume accordingly. Stay tuned!

-------

Finals

2:20 PM

We are delighted to have Justice (Retd.) Satish Chandra and Prof. Dr. Nuzhat Parveen Khan, Dean Jamia Milia Islamia as the Judges for final round.

The Finals are about to begin. Symbiosis Law, Pune and NLIU, Bhopal are up against each other. Symbiosis, Pune is reperesenting the Petitioners and NLIU is representing the Respondents.

2: 25 PM

The esteemed Judges have arrived. The Participants have settled down. The audience is jam packed to witness the battle between the best. 1st Speaker of the Petitioners moves to the podium.

The first issue presented by the petitioner is the issue of maintainabilty, and quotes Article 136 of the constitution of latveria to substantiate the arguments.

The Judges threw the first question which the speaker answered confidently.

2:30 PM

Speaker for the Petitioner has now moved to the second issue that talks about the Writ petition, which challenges the constitutionality of the SSA and contends that it is against article 19 and article 21 of the Constitution of Latveria.

A difficult question is placed on the speaker by the Judges, but she circumvented it and moves forward with her arguments.   

2:35 PM

The third issue is now underway which deals with the case of defamation. The speaker for petitioner takes the plea of exception 9 of section 499 of the Latverian Penal Code that is exception of goodwill.

The judges posed the question about the immunity of a journalist while making a publication. The speaker answers this question gracefuly while mentioning Navtej Singh Johar case.

2:40 PM

The speaker proceeds to the next issue that challenges the constitutionality of section 124(A). The Judges are quizing the speaker about cases other than Kedarnath Singh v State of UP regarding Sedition.

2:45 PM

The Judges seem to be appreciating the arguements of the petitioner regarding the misuse of section 124(A), however the bombardment of intelligent questions on the petitioner by the judges is making the speaker nervous forcing her to deviate from the script.

The counsel contends that the punishment in section 124(A) is disproportionate.

2:50 PM

The petitioner seems well prepared with the case and takes help of the statistics to further her arguements.

The judges have remarked on the difficulty of striking down section 124(A) owing to it being upheld in several landmark cases.

The first speaker for the petitoner concludes her arguements.

2:55 PM

The second speaker begins with the arguements starting with her first issue challenging the constitutionality of SSA.

The petitioner pleads that SSA is unconstituional as it violates Part 3 of the constitution. The bench tells the council to proceeds with the part regarding SSA, as her co-counsel has already argued the same.

3:00 PM

The speaker concludes her issue and the judges looks satisfied. She now  proceeds with the prayer.

3:05 PM

The first speaker for respondents is granted permission to approach the dias and begin with her arguements. 

The first issue raised by the respondents about the maintainabilty of petitions contending that writ and SLP are not maintainable. The respondent sheds light on the fact that the petition was filed prematurely and no fundamental rights were violated, hence Article 32 cannot be invoked.

3:10 PM

The judges pointed out that the order given by the HIgh Court was not reasoned one. Judges seems unsatisfied and asked the counsel to proceed to the next case law.

The counsel states the case of M.H. George v State of Maharashtra and they further contends that an SLP can only can only be invoked in exceptional cases or matters of grave injustice.

 3:20 PM
 Speaker niow moves on to her second issue which deals with the charges of defamation on Ms. Helena Mallaya, stating down the essential of an act to qualify as a defamatory act.

The judges pointed out that there are some exceptions to defamation where the speaker is trying ot prove that all the essential are satisfied and the act doesn't fall under exceptions.

The respondents contends that the petitioner is delebrately making the imputation for diminishing the reputation of respondents as there was no good faith involved.

3:25 PM

Speaker now  moves on the next issue reagarding the constitutionality of section 124(A). The judges asks if there can't exist a voice of dissent against the government in the country and opines that the concepts of election is therefore, essentially defeated.

The judge is trying to gauge whether the speaker is trying to say if the section needs revision or what excatly it is that the respondents was.

3:30 PM

The respondents have walked into a trap regarding the abuse of section 124(A) and pleads the judges for extra time, the judges have informed him the time will be adjusted with the Co counsel.

The second speaker takes the podium and commences with the arguements. The judges belief that the counsel is confused with regard to Securities law and they remark that their knowledge is based on Google search as they haven't yet learnt the topic.

3:35 PM

The counsel argues the present situation of the country should be taken into account. The judge retorted that the state didn't legislate the law pertatining to a temporary situation but has a general applicability.

The judge is drawing similarities between the imposition of SSA and  MISA which was imposed during emergency by Indira Gandhi. The judges seem satisfied and allow the respondent to proceed further to the next issue.

3:42 PM 

The counsel is done with her arguements and seeks the permission to recite the prayer. 

Speaker of the Petitioners now approaches the podium for rebuttals. Again, just relevant pointers.

3:52 PM

Petitoners are done with there rebuttals. Respondents have started with surrebuttals.

3:56 PM

We are finally done with the Final Round. Teams are now waiting for their feedbacks.

4:00 PM

We'll soon be back with the Valedictory ceremony and the results of 18th edition of Amity National Moot Court Competition, 2019. Don't let the excitement subside. 

----- 

Valedictory Ceremony

The valedictory ceremony shall see the likes of Justice (Retd.) Satish Chandra and Prof. Dr. Nuzhat Parveen Khan, Dean Jamia Milia Islamia.

4:40 PM

Prof.(Dr.) D. K. Bandyopadhyay, Chairman, Amity Law Schools delievers his opening address. He appericiated all the volunteers for their efforts in making 18th edition of ANMCC a great success. He conveyed his best wishes to the participants for their future endeavours.

 4:50 PM

The Guest of Honour Prof. Dr. Nuzhat Parveen Khan, Dean, Jamia Milia Islamia addresses the students. She talks about the art of oration whilst stating the importance of mooting in honing the speaking skills. For the conclusion of her speech she extended her best whish to all the student for the future. 

5:10 PM

The Chief Guest Justice (Retd.) Satish Chandra, former Judge of Allahabad High Court is now addressing the students. He quoted "without moot court leagl profession can't be completed", and sheds light on the importance of mooting in a law students life. while wrapping up his speech he talks about the growing crisis of fake news around the globe and the importance of legislation to curb it.

Results

5:25 PM

Finally the mystery unfolds! The moment we all have been waiting for

And the winner is *Deep breaths*

NLIU, BHOPAL

Runners up- Symbiosis Law School, Pune

Best Memorial- Symbiosis Law School, Pune

Best Researcher- Prakshit Baid, SVKM, Narsee Monji

Best Oralist- Akshita Totla, School of Law, Nirma University

5:45 PM

ANMCC Convener Mr. Setu Gupta presents the vote of thanks and expressed his gratitude to all the Volunteers for making the event a grand success and having this months long endeavour finally come to its conclusion.

5:55 PM 

Break for High Tea.

-------

(Prafulla)

And so with this, the ANMCC 2019 has finally come to an end. We really appreciate everyone who helped us out in one way or another. We hope the Participants and the Judges had a great ANMCC experience.

Here's the media committee signing off. Until next year!*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Subject to the turn of tide.