is satisfied that a law has become obsolete or it requires to be modified to suit to the changed need of the society, the

Legislature may obliterate the same. This is called ‘Repeal”. peal’ means abolition or revocation of a law. The repeal of a law is exclusive domain ofh Legislature. Parliament may repeal a perpetual statute and bring it to an end. A temporary statute can also be repealed before completion of its life. But as far as expiry of a statute is concerned, it is only temporary statute that expires. The perpetual statute never expires. It lasts forever. There is no fixed life span of a perpetual statute. It is eternal It can only be abolished or cancelled by Parliament by the process of “repeal’), CKinds of repeal Parliament has power to make law and to repeal any existing law—be it temporary statute or a perpetual statute. Repeal may be brought by the Legislature in two ways : (a) The Legislature may enact a distinct repealing enactment to declare that an earlier Act has been abolished. It is called “Express Repeal”. (b) The Legislature may enact an enactment which is so inconsistent with the earlier Act that no harmony between the two is possible or it covers the entire subject matter of the earlier statute. This is called “Implied Repeal” of the earlier Act. No repeal can be brought unless there is express repeal of an earlier Act by a later Act or two Acts cannot stand together. Express repeal

Essentials of express repeal The essential ingredients of an express repeal are mentioned below (a) There must be a subsequent repealing Act.. it enacts a law which is so contradictory to an existing law that both cannot be given effect to..all provisions inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed” Implied repeal In this case.shall cease to have effect” TEMPORARY AND PERPETUAL STATUTES ThE)R EXPRY AND REPEAL 287 . Thus. (b) Such subsequent Act must seek to repeal an earlier Act. when an earlier Act is repealed by later distinct and repealing Act. is hereby repealed” . The implied repea1 takes place in two ways (a) When subsequent Act is so inconsistent with earlier Act that only one of the two can remain in force . implied repeal is the result of inconsistent subsequent legislation. (c) Specific words must be used in the subsequent repealing Act showing clear intendment to effect repeal of an earlier Act. it is called “express repeal”..shall be inoperative’ .The dictionary meaning of the word “express” is “clearly and definitely stated”. Instead...enactment declares m unequivocal terms that an existing law is sought to be repealed with effect from a particular day..shall be invalid’ “. (d) Usually any one of the following forms are employed to intend the express repeal— “.. This implies abrogation of the existing law. the Legislature does not use the words to precisely show its intention to repeal a law.. The later. Therefore.

when it does not provide a repealing provision. Implied repeal may operate on a part of statute or on its entirety..’ it was held that a repeal may be express or implied.(b) When a subsequent Act covers whole subject matter of the earlier Act and intended to be a substitute for the earlier Act) In Atal Tea Co. can be said to have been repealed by implication. Repeal shall not be inferred if two Acts can be read together and some 1. It was held that there is no saving clause. CDoctrine of implied repeal is based on the presumption that the Legislature knows existing laws and it did not intend to create confusion by enacting and retaining conflicting provisions. Reason is based on the theory that Legislature while enacting a law has complete knowledge of existing laws on the same subject matter and therefore. If repugnancy relates to a part of statute. Regional PF Commr. The discretionary power to levy damages stands curtailed by virtue of amendment. This section was amended in 1988. provisions of Section 14-B so far as it conferred the discretionary power to determine the rates at which damages would have to be levied. 1952. it gives out an intention not to repeal existing legislation. that part of statute will stand repealed only to the extent of repugnancy. 1998 (79) FLR 372 Cal He. By this amendment. This rule may be overcome not only by express words in the Act but also by circumstances sufficiently strong to displace it. In this case question was relating to Section 14-B of Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. There is a presumption against retrospectivity. v. power of Commissioner to levy damages was curtailed. By way of amendment. Formerly it was up to 100% and now it is as per sliding table under para 32-A of the scheme. application may be made of words in earlier Act. The amended and unamended Section 14-B are really incompatible and inconsistent with one another so far as rates of levy of damages are concerned. Presumption against implied repeal There is a presumption against repeal by implication. If provisions of a later enactment are so inconsistent or repugnant with the provisions of an earlier one that the two cannot stand together. the earlier Act can be said to have been repealed by implication. There is no real distinction in essence between a repeal and an amendment. Ltd. Test of implied repeal . Point is whether this curtailment of power is prospective• or applied also in connection with defaults prior to amendment for which no action was initiated prior to amendment.

2. leans against implying repeal. The following aspects must be thoroughly considered. (a) Whether the earlier and later laws are in direct conflict with each other. State of M. it is impossible to ascertain whether any inconsistency exists between two enactments. (c) Whether subsequent Act is so inconsistent with earlier Act that both the laws cannot harmoniously co-exist and only one of the two can remain in force. did not intend to create any confusion by retaining conflicting provisions and therefore. it does not more than give effect to the intention of the Legislature by examining the scope and the object of the two enactments and by comparison of their provisions. a repeal will not be implied.. unless later law intends to be exhaustive Code. 2004 (1) Mh IA sc 306. In Harish Chandra v.P v. which is presumed to know the existing law. Implied repeal may also be concluded when legislative intent is to bring exhaustive Code in respect of subject matter replacing earlier law.Owing to abovementioned presumption against repeal by implication. The court 1.P. they cannot be said to “occupy the same field” and there will be no inconsistency and no implied repeal. . (e) Whether Legislature intended to lay down an exhaustive Code in respect of subject matter replacing earlier law Implied repeal could therefore be inferred only when the earlier and later law operate in the same field and occupy the same field but are so inconsistent with each other that both of them cannot co-exist in harmony and only one can survive. (d) Whether two laws occunyJhe same field. (b) Whether the contradiction is so serious that no reconciliation is possible. when the court applies the doctrine. very cautious approach is required while inferring repeal. In such cases. repeal should not be readily concluded. Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. In State of M. Unless two Acts are so plainly repugnant to each other that effect cannot be given to both at the same time. Until this is done. In the absence of clear words. or that there is necessary inconsistency in the two Acts standing together. and others. MR 1965 Sc 932.2 it was observed that the doctrine of implied repeal is based on the theory that the Legislature. The matter in each case is one of the construction and comparison of the two statutes. the earlier law is deemed to have been repealed by implication.’ it was held that if two laws “operate in the same field” without collision. To determine whether a later statute repeals by implication an earliei it is necessary to scrutinize the terms and consider the true meaning and effect of earlier Act.

i or__legislation is repealed by implication—Where the provisions of subsequent Act directly contradict the provisions of the earlier Act and there is no possibility of reconciliation between them or when the subsequent Act covers whole subject matter of the earlier Act. In such cases.stency and contradiction. Prioriecii-il law is iiot repealed by later general law—Ordinarily. The former does not render compliance with latter impossible. it is the previous law which stands repealed by implication. it cannot be said that the two laws could not stand together. . In Zhi Municipality v.-5 Implied repeal may not__opçte on entire statute—It is not necessary that the whole statute is impliedly repealed. the earlier law stands repealed by implication. Implied repeal of earlier law can be inferred only when subsequent law occupies the same field. implied repeal may be inferred. implied repeal of earlier Act may be inferred. Implied repeal may affect only a part of the earlier Act. nor compliance of former involves violation of latter. not the later one. There could be implied repeal of earlier legislation when the later law operates in the same field and occupies the same field. Although both contained regulating provisions and laid down standards of quality and composition of vinegar. yet contradicts the earlier one—Implied repeal carmot be inferred if the previous law and later law can be read together and both of them can be applied. 1954 and Rules made thereunder relating to vinegar were not impliedly repealed by the subsequent Essential Commodities Act. 1955. there is no implied repeal in respect of such provisions. 441 Implied repeal may be concluded when exhaustive Code is intended—When legislative intent is to replace earlier law by an exhaustive Code in respect of subject matter. It may be appreciated that in these circumstances. ‘. AIR 1971 SC 815. a prior particular law or special law is not readily inferred to be repealed by a 1. without interference. but cannot co-exist with it due to inco. Shivshank. may be to limited extent. The question of implied repeal in such cases shall be confined to only those provisions of previous Act which have been contradicted in the later Act. Where certain provisions of later enactment are similar to or are in agreement with the earlier law and both can stand and operate together.General principles of implied repeal Some general principles governing implied repeal are mentioned below: h) Qjji.’ it was held that the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

It was held that provisions of Municipal Act were not repealed by the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. operation of particular Act may have effect of partially repealing general Act. Bareilly v. Tribunal or National Tribunal except with consent of other parties and with leave of Labour Court. In such case.J.’ the provisionsof Municipal Act were in question which empowered a Municipal Authority to provide for bus stands. AIR 1990 sc 548. Tribunal or National Tribunal. Joseph.I. In Paradip Port Trust. In Damji v. In Municipal Board.ia derogant’ which means that special things derogate from general things. Both the provisions were enabling ones and there could be no question of conflict till the authority in later Motor Vehicle Act also provided for bus stand in same areas for which bus stands had already been provided under Municipal Act. Subsequently. then earlier general law is affected by the later special law. 8IA prior g. AIR 1966 Sc 135. where certain matters were being dealt with by a general law and subsequently the Legislature enacts a special law on such matters. Advocates Act. 1961 was enacted Section 30 of which provides that every advocate shall be entitled as a right to practise in all courts and before any Tribunal. 1956 is a general provision and Sections 15 and 41 of Life Insurance Corporation Act. It was expressly provided that the new rules will 1. Paradip v. The subsequent Motor Vehicle Act empowered the Government to do the same. The basis of this doctrine is the principle of generalia speciali o der which means that general things do nor rom special things. 1947 was in question which provides that a party carmot be represented by a legal practitioner before a Labour Court. 1961. 1947 was not affected by Section 30 of Advocates Act. T.later general law. in the absence of clear and unequivocal words..‘ the State Government had framed rules regulating levy of octroi in general by all Municipalities. Bharat Oil Co.iz&t—law may be affected by subsequent particular Act—Where the subject matter of a later particular Act was being governed by a general Act. 4. It was held that the provision under Section 36 (4) of Industrial Disputes Act. Their Workmen. a special law cannot be abrogated by a subsequent general Act. Therefore the Company Court has no jurisdiction on the matters which fall within the Life Insurance Corporation Act. Reason for reaching this conclusion was that Municipal Act was special law which applied to Municipal area but Motor Vehicles Act was general Act applying to all areas in general.C. Thereafter rules were framed by State Government for levy of octroi by Barielly Municipality. AIR 1963 sc 1561. such general law may be affected by later special law.2 Section 36 (4) of Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 is a special law.3 it was held that Section 446 of Companies Act. Therefore. . In Municipal Council Palai v. AIR 1977 Sc 36. 2. To explain it further. The basis of this doctrine is the principle of ‘generalibus special. . 1956. Industrial Disputes Act. 3. L. 1956 are special provisions.

then implied repeal of earlier Act cannot be inferred. Under this Act.. 1890 provided for a forum where a suit for compensation for loss of life or of personal injury to. Section 80 was held to be special provision of a self contained Code and it impliedly repealed in respect of suits covered by it the general provisions of Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure.’ the Central Government made notification under Essential Commodities Act. The new Act did not contain any express provision for repealing the earlier Act. In Ratanial Adukia v. destruction. (‘ implied repeal can be inferred if later law imposes different punishment? for same offence—Where an offence created by an earlier Act is again described in a later Act and the later Act varies the procedure or 1.P. It was held that the State Government was competent to issue the order. Before expiry of Punjab Damaged Areas Act. This notification declared a certain area as “damaged area”. 441ffirmative enactment is not repealed bya subsequent affirmative Act—One affirmative enactment is not easily taken to be repealed by another later affirmative enactment. Where the operative terms of two enactments are identical and the enactments run parallel to each other. In Trust Mai Lachhmi Sialkoti Bradari v. hgr’ onferral of similar powers under two enactments at different levels does not result -irr7 ipie. Question was whether the notification could be deemed to be a notification under later Act. a passenger or for loss. AIR 1990 SC 104. the repeal shall be inferred. a notification was issued in 1948. there\ would be no scope of application of doctrine of implied repeal. State Government issued an order under Defence of India Rules clarifying that the higher rate could not be charged in respect of the stock already existing since prior to upward revision of rate. no question of inconsistency could arise. namely East Punjab Damaged Areas Act. State of U. 1947.apply in supersession of existing rules. It was observed that there is no legal bar to creating two sources of power to achieve the same purpose and that there was no real inconsistency as the order of State was supplementary to Centre’s notification. This new Act was brought into force from April 1949. 1949 was enacted. But if later Act is precise negative of whatever authority existed under earlier Act.’ Section 80 of Railways Act. It was held that there was deemed repeal of earlier rules.8. 1908. but it covered the same subject matter.1949. 1955 fixing higher rate of price of an essential commodity. Contention was that earlier Act was impliedly repealed by later Act due to identical terms. In Ramehandra Mawalal v. deterioration or non-delivery of goods or animals against railway administration may be brought. Amritsar improvement Trust.2 Punjab Damaged Areas Act. a new Act. It was held that where two enactments are entirely affirmative and identical. damage. peaFfearlier Act—If the similar powers are conferred by two legislations at different levels. 1947 was a temporary statute which was due to expire on 15. Union of india. .

(3) As per general law. Union of India. Veereshwar Rao. Article 20 (2) of the Constitution directs that no person shall be prosecuted and punished for same offence more that once. all laws passed under it stand repealed unless there is a saving provision. except in relation to the past and closed transactions. Both these provisions apply only when two offences are same. in such a case the earlier Act stands repealed by implication. imposes different punishment for that offence. The absence of a saving clause in the new enactment preserving the rights and liabilities under the repealed law is neither material nor decisive of the question. (2) Repealed Act ceases to exist and does not remain in force with effect from the date of repeal. (4) When an Act is repealed. this principle has no application. the proper approach is not to enquire if the new enactment has by its new provisions kept alive the rights and liabilities under the repealed law but whether it has taken away those rights and liabilities. then the offender shall be liable to be punished under either or any of those enactments. ffect and consequences of repeal A previous law may be repealed either expressly or by implication. In both the cases. . But if offence under two enactments is not identical. Following are the effects of repeal of an enactment (1) Later Act abrogates prior one. none of these provisions shall apply. all rights and causes of action under repealed statute are destroyed. AIR 1963 SC 976. In State of Madhya Pradesh v. but shall not be punished twice for the same offence.2. As such.1 Section 26 of General Clauses Act provides that where an act of omission constitutes an offence under two or more enactments.2 it was held that in order to see whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law have been put to an end by the new enactment. But where offence described in later Act is different from offence described in earlier Act. the consequences are same. In Jayantilal Amrathlal v. 3. (1984) (Supp) SCC 28. a statute after repeal is completely obliterated as if it had never been enacted.

under which compulsory retirement was given. the retirement was invalid because of non-payment of full amount of three months’ salary. another rule was substituted. As a result. However. 2. Thus. a government servant was retired on payment of an amount as salary. AIR 1971 Sc 1193. the present position is that the first Act is not so revived unless third Act makes an express provision to that effect.€1) A law can be retrospectively amended to validate the transactions made under it. the amount paid to that government servant was found to be short of three month’s salary. came to be repealed. In State of Rajasthan v. However. AIR 1957 SC 592. (2007) 5 scc 447. This amendment was indeed retrospective but was effective for the period during which the old rule . where one statute ‘A’ is repealed by a second statute ‘B’. Electricity Inspector.1 the Apex Court held that when a statute is repealed or comes to an automotive end by efflux of time. During the period earlier rule was in operation. after repeal of a statute. revives. In case the parent statute is repealed. those cases remain unaffected by such repeal in which the proceedings have been brought to finality prior to repeal of the statute. v. As a general rule. an amendment was brought to the rule after its repeal. in order to validate the action.3 it was held that a notification which is duly issued will continue to govern unless repealed.P. This rule was subsequently repealed and in its place. Jagmander Das. In State of U. Mangilal Pindwal. this common rule has been abrogated by Sections 6 (a) and 7 of General Clauses Act. no prosecution for the acts done during continuance of repealed/expired Act can be commenced after date of its repeallexpiry because that would amount to enforcement at repealed or a dead Act. Ltd. (5) No proceedings can be commenced or continued under an Act after its repeal. The cases already completed shall not be reopened by the reason of repeal of 1. the law which was in force at the commencement of the repealed statute. Therefore. unless contrary is provided in the third statute ‘C’. 1897. law under which prosecution was made. When calculated later. 3. Meanwhile the rule.2 there was a rule which permitted the Government to effect compulsory retirement of a government servant by paying three month’s salary. the notification would also stand repealed unless and to the extent. v. . saved by repealing Act. the effect is that the first statute ‘A’ revives. even after its repeal. and subsequently statute ‘B’ is also repealed by a third statute ‘C’. As per the terms of the rule.In Southern Petrochemical Industries Co.

the rights and liabilities accrued under a law do not extinguish due to repeal of that law. 2. South Hams Distt. AIR 1996 sc 2181. According to amendment. it can be retrospectively amended to affect such transactions even after its repeal. If the notice was not complied with. ‘-4(’When an existing statute is repealed by a temporary statute. No enactment of it was required. Government could retire a government servant forthwith without paying him three month’s salary but entitling him to claim salary after retirement. Corporation. AIR 1949 c 90. AIR 1954 Sc 683. White. The Local Authority under Control of Pollution Act was empowered to serve a notice to a person directing him to abate the nuisance within a specified period. When by the fiat of Parliament the temporary repeal expired. 3. In Hamilton Gell v. It was held that the notice was effective and person contravening the notice was liable to be punished for the offence under the Act even though the Act was abrogated.) According to common law the effect of repeal is that the statute is completely obliterated and all rights under repealed statute are destroyed. the original legislation automatically resumed its full force. after issuance of which the law stood repealed. However. It was observed that since the repeal of law takes effect from the date of repeal and law repealed remains in operation for the period before its repeal without assistance of any saving clause for transaction past and closed.B. The question was whether the notice was still effective after repeal of the Act under which it was issued and can punishment be imposed for non-compliance of the notice. After service of notice but prior to expiration of the period stipulated in the notice for compliance. The amendment was held to be valid. . . the repealed Act revives. the Local Authority was also empowered to hold the contravener liable for criminal offence in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In Aitken v.4 the question was whether right to receive compensation survived after repeal of law? A tenant of agricultural holding has a right to receive compensation from landlord if landlord serves a notice to him to quit with a view of an intended sale of holding. In this case a notice under the Act was served.remained in operation. It was held that the right is an accrued right which will be preserved even after repeal of statute under which the right was conferred. it is a temporary repeal. C.3 it was held that the repeal effected by a temporary legislation was only a temporary repeal. 1. After expiry of such temporary Act. In Gooderham and Worts v. the Act was repealed. Some citations to this effect are given below.3 the issue was relating to the fate of a notice. Council.

In Sakharam v. 4. . v. (1922). Such tenant has certain rights which were held to be accrued rights. 1962 was absolute and could be enforced after expiry of these Acts. These rights shall survive even after repeal of the statute.16 of Samvat 2005.In Free Lanka Insurance Co. In Amadalavalasa Cooperative Agriculture and Industrial Society Ltd.5 the issue was whether a person who sustains injury in motor accident has a right to claim damages from the insurer of motor vehicles even after repeal of statute? It was held that this right is an accrued right which is enforceable even after repeal of the enactment creating liability. Manikchand. even if the process of determination of amount is not complete before repeal. (1964) 1 All ER 457. Bhupendra Kumar. In State of Haryana v. if he has held the land for certain number of years and has personally cultivated the same. Ranasinghe. after which it expired. 6. AIR 1962 Sc 945. even if the full value of goods or factory was determined by authorized officer under these Acts after their expiry. AIR 1997 Sc 718. J. 1945 was repealed by Pepsu Ordinance No. 1962 and Emergency Risks (Goods) Act.6 the question was whether the rights of a protected tenant survive after repeal of the Act? A tenant is deemed to be 1. The Ordinance survived for a period of six months. 5. protected tenant. 3. v. Union of India.’ GAJENDRA GAUKAR. 2. Amarnath Bansal. It was held that the Regulations did not revive after expiration of the Ordinance because the intention in repealing the Regulations was to repeal them absolutely.2 KB 422.2 Jind State Civil Services Regulation. In State of Orissa v. (1994) 3 All ER 400.1 it was held that the Liability to take insurance policy for full value of factory or goods under Emergency Risks (Factories) Act. AIR 1963 Sc 354.. observed that intention of temporary Act in repealing earlier Act will have to be considered and no general or inflexible rule in that behalf can be laid down.

unless a different intention appears. 1934. then. the repeal shall not (a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect. Lucas.2 the question was whether the liability remains even after the repeal of the rules giving rise to such liability? Under Chhota Udepur Forest Rules. forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid. or (d) affect any penalty. obligation or liability acquired or incurred under any enactment so repealed. In Odgen Industries Ltd. This right accrues only on death of workman and not at the time when injury causing death was sustained by workman. privilege. It was held that the liability will survive even after repeal of these rules. (10) Section 6 of General Clauses Act. legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted 1. AIR 1993 sc s35. If the law is amended to enhance the compensation and such amendment takes effect after workman sustains injury but before he dies succumbing to those injuries. (1969) 1 All ER 121 (PC). v. or any Central Act or regulation made after commencement of this Act. obligation. 2. or (c) affect any right. . 1897 provides the effect of repeal as under Where this Act. 3. repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made. or (e) affect any investigation. AIR 1976 SC 958. legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right. forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed. Under Workmen’s Compensation Act. liability. the dependents have right to claim compensation. the landholder was under liability not to cut trees in those forests which were declared to be reserved forests. privilege. if a workman dies. State of Gujarat. penalty. or (b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder.In Salchbhai Mulla Mohamadali v. and any such investigation. the employer is liable for enhanced payment as compensation.3 the right of dependents of deceased workman to claim compensation was in question.

 ° ¾½ n€¾ © n¯f  ½fn°– f f ¯½  ½ fn   €  °€  ° °  f f° f f½ f ° ¾f¯ €   f° nn½ ¾f¯ €   f ¾°n°¾¾ ° fn f € ¯nf°°n ¾° f¯°f° °° nf°¾ ¯½  ½ f¯ff¾ n°n  ° –¾f ° °¾ °– f¾ .

 ° ¾½ n€¾ © n¯f  ½fn°– f f °¾nnf¾ ¾   f f¾ ¯ f  ° ½ f  ¯½nf°  °f €. 9  f f f°  f°  ¾ f¾ ¾  f  n° €¯½   ½ f¾ f¾ °  f  –¾f n¾½ ¾¯ °  ¾°–f   ° ° ° n f f°n°€¾°  f°°–n°€n°–½¾°¾f°   €  ° nf½½ ¾   n°   ¾°¯ f°–  €€ n ° °°€  –¾f   f¯°°– ¾n½  f°   © n€  °fn¯ °¾f°  n¯½f¾°€ ½¾°¾ @ ¯f ° fnnf¾ ¾ ° € n°¾n°f° n¯½f¾°€ ¾f ¾ @ n  .¾n     f°¾f–f°¾¯½°– ½ f D° ¾¾n¾f ¾½f° ½–°f° fn f €€ nnf°° – ° f ¾f¯ ¯ f ½ f° ¯½ f  ¾° n ¾¾f°n°¾¾ °n ° n¾¾f° °––   @  ¯°   ff ¾f  ½ f¾ ¯½nf°f° f  ¾° n ¾¾f¾n°   ¯¾f° n°¾   ¯ f°°–f°  €€ n€ f n D°¾ ¾ ° ¾¯½¾¾  f¾n f°  f°°n°¾¾ °n ¾¾  ° °fn¯ °¾  .n   %%.

©© %% –¾f°¾ ½ f  ¯½nf° J   ½¾°¾€¾ ¾  °n  n n°f n ½¾°¾€  f nf°   ¾°½¾¾ € n°nf°  ° ¯  ° ¾ ¾  °nn ¾ ¾ © n¯f €  f n ¯½  ½ f¯f °€   ¯f f½½ nf f° ¾ nn¯¾f°n ¾ ¾ ½ ¾fn¾f° ¾ ½ f   ¯½nf° ° f °  # ¯½  ½ f¯f°%%½s ° ° ¾f ¾°° n ¾¾ff  ¾f ¾ ¯½  ½ f ¯½  ½ f¯ff€€ n°f½f€  f n J  n f°½¾°¾€ f  °fn¯ °f ¾¯ff °f– ¯ °  f ff°  nf°¾f° f° ½ f  –     ¾°¯½  ½ f° ¾½ n€¾n½¾°¾ @  ¾°€¯½  ½ f°¾n nf¾ ¾¾f n°€° °¾ ½¾°¾€½ ¾nnf  °n°f n °  f n  ¯½  ½ f€ f fnf° °€  ° °¾ ¾  °fnn½ ¾ ¾f¯ €    n°f n¾  f ° ¯½  ½ fnf¯ °€  € ½ ¾ff° f fnf°   f –  f°  € ¯nf° f½½ ¯f ¯   ° ° €  °n @   n  ¯½  ½ f€ f  –¾f° ° f f½ f ¾° ¾f¯ €  f° nn½ ¾  ¾f¯ €   nf°°n ¾  °n ¾ °nf° n°f n°  °.°n½f ¾f° #f¾  f 9  °°€   f°n f°   ¾¯f   °  f°–° –f  °¯½  ½ f   ¾ ¾  °¾¾ °f . ° f½°n½ ¾€¯½  ½ f ¯ – ° f½°n½ ¾– °°–¯½  ½ ff ¯ °°    %.

¯¯  ¾n  – n°f°  –f°–½¾°¾f° f  °¾f° f ¾€ ff° n¯½¾°€° –f nf°° ¾f f f¾n °¾f° –   @  €¯   ¾° ° n¯½f°n f ¯½¾¾  °n¯½f°n €€¯ ° ¾f° €f   ¯½  ½ f¯f n°n  ° f¾ .

 ¾° ° J ° –¾f ° °¾  ½fn  f f f° f¾ .

 ° ¾½ n€¾ © n¯f  ¯½  ½ f€ f n¯f °€  °¾nnf¾ ¾   f f¾f° ¾ ½ f  ¯½nf°  9 n f¾ ½ f  f – ° ff  °f f½½fnff¾½ nff¾ ° f °€    ½ f  f   .


f – ° ff @  f¾¾€¾ n° ¾ ½°n½ €– ° ff¾½ nf n¯ f°¾f – ° f°–¾ °¯¾½ nf°–¾ @  € ° f ¾ °n €n ff° ° nf ¾ f ¾½ nffnf°° f –f  f¾ ¾  °– ° fn  °.°n½f.

°n9ff @  ¾ ½ # ½¾°¾€.I n ¾n  f¾°€ fn°–¾n°n¾°f¾f .°n½fnf¾¾½ nffnf½½ .I n ¾nf¾– ° fn f½½°–ff f¾°– ° f   ½¾°¾   °f °–° ¾f°   n  ° ¾° €n°€n f°f .°n½fn  ° ¾°n ¯½  f.°n½fn  °9ff ½9@¾ 9ff ½ @ J¯ °  n°%%€° ¾f¾½ ¾n f¾°  ¾°n½ ¾ff½fnf¯  ½ ¾ °  f –f½fn°  € ff  .°n½f½ € ¾¾f° ¾ @ ¾ ¾  °.°n½fn  °  ½ f   ½¾°¾€.I n n ¯½    °¯ °  ¾f¯ f¾  f½¾°¾€.I n nf¾½ € ¾¾f° °¾f¯ f f¾€ n ¾¾f° ¾f f f  °½ ° .°n½ff f .

 @ °f-f°f@ °f n ½n°¾ °€ ½f ¾f°  f €f .

  @ °f-f°f@ °f ° ¾f¾½ ¾n ¾f¾½ nff  ¾  °  nf ¾n  f¾ °fn  n°€n½ ¾f  f nf ¾f  ° f¾f– ½fn¾ °fn¾f°  € f°@ °f f¾  f ½¾°°  n°%%€ ° ¾f¾½ ¾n f¾°f€€ n   n°€ nf ¾n   ½–   f¯f f€€ n  ¾ ¾  °½fnfn J   ¾ © n¯f €ff  ½fnfnf¾ °–– °  f– ° fn ¾n– ° ff¯f f€€ n  f ¾½ nf f @ ½f°€    n f°¯f ¾   °– f f– ° fff°  ¾ ¾  °  –¾f  °fn¾f¾½ nff°¾n¯f ¾  ° f – ° ff¾f€€ n    f ¾½ nff @  f¾¾€¾ n° ¾ ½°n½ €#– ° f ¾¾½ nf f –f°#n ¯ f°¾f¾½ nf°–¾ –f €¯– ° f°–¾ °¾nnf¾ ½ f°€½fnfn¯f f  €€ n€½ff ½ f°–– ° fn  °f¯©   .

f¾  f n°€.

¯½f° ¾n ¾f– ° f½¾°f°   n°¾f° €€ °¾f°n .

½f°n f ¾½ nf½¾°¾ @  €   .


f¾°©¾ n°° ¯f ¾n€f° € °¾f°n .

°n½f f  f   ff.½f°n    °.

°n½f f¾ ½ ¾¾½ f °  ¾  ¾n   n   n   ¾n  .°n½f ¾ @  f€  ¾  €f¯  f  °¯ °€ € n  f .  # f  °¯ °f €f¯  ¾ –f°– € n°– ° f f.

f½½°¾½ ¾ ¾¾°€ ¾°– ¾ f¾  f  f¾ ¯  ½ f€ f  ¾  °ff°f f D°°€° f # n°€ff¾n ½ €f€¯  f¾ €n¯½ °¾f°€¾¾€€ € ½ ¾°f°© f½f¾¾ °– €¾¾  ¾n°  f¯f–   f°°°  €– ¾ f°¯f¾f–f°¾fff ¯°¾f°¯f  –  n°f¾   ¾½ nf½¾°€ f¾ €n°f° .

 f° ¯½  ½ f ° ¾½ n€¾¾n    – ° f½¾°¾€  n°€ .


ffn¯f f f ¯¾f¯½ ¯ °@¾ 9°©f f¯f–  f¾n  f¾f ¯½f¾f nf¾   ½ °   D° ¾n f°€nf°f¾¾¾  ° @¾°€nf° nf fn f°f ff¾# f¯f– f f#  €  ½€9°©f f¯f–   f¾n  f° n °f¯ f¾9°©f f¯f–  f¾n f¾ °fn @¾° n f¾ –°€n €¯½ @ ° n  °n°f°f° ½ ¾¾½¾°€ ½ f°–   f n  n   ¾f¯ ¾ © n¯f  .9n    €€¯f  °fn¯ °¾° ½ f  f¾ ¾  °f€€¯f  n ° f€€¯f  °fn¯ °¾° f¾f °  ½ f  f° f f€€¯f  °fn¯ °  €f n¾½ n¾ ° –f €f  f ¾ °  f n   ½ f ¾f °€   °@¾. ¾°f¾   °€nf°n   ¯  f°€nf°° f n .

° °°f¾f f nf¾¯½  ½ f   f n   °nf ¯¾ f¾  f   °fn¯ °¾f  ° f€€¯f f°   °nf ° ¾°€°n°¾¾ °nn f¾ J   ½ f  ¯¾€ °fn¯ °¾f   °nff°   °fn¯ °¾°½ff  fn      °¾n½ €f½½nf°€ n° €¯½  ½ f  –#°€ f€¾¯f½ ¾°  °fn¯ °¾f €€  °  ¾  ¾° ¾ ½  ½ f€ f n € ¾¯f½ ¾f n°€    –¾f°¾f €€  °  ¾  °¯½   ½ f€ f nnf°° °€   °f¯ f° f.fff f €D 9 # .

°f °¯ °¯f °€nf°° ¾¾ °f .

¯¯  ¾n €°–– f €½n €f° ¾¾ °fn¯¯  f  °¯ °¾¾  f° °  € °n €° f ¾nf€°–f – f n ° nf– ° ¾½ n€  ¾nf f  ¾°–¾°n ½½f  ¾°€f f¾  f f  °¯ ° f¾n¯½  °¾¾    f¾ ¾  f  ¾° –f fn f°–¾n ¾€ ½ fn   ¾f¯ ½½¾ f° f  f¾° f°n°¾¾ °nf¾  €f f¾ ¾½½ ¯ °f.

° #¾°€nf°  %#¯½  ½ fnf° °€  €f f¯½¾ ¾ €€  °½°¾¯ °"€¾f¯ €€ °n J  f° €€ °n n f  f° f n¾f–f° ¾n °ff nf°  f nf ¾ ½n     .





f f9f ¾ I  ¾ff  n°€ ° f.    ¯½¾ ¾ €€  °½°¾¯ °€f€€ °n °¾nfnf¾   f n¾f° ¾ ½ f   ¯½nf°    €€ °n  ¾n °f n¾ €€  °€¯€€ °n  ¾n ° f n ¾½°n½ f¾°f½½nf°  °f €.

f¾ ¾n½ ¾f   f°fn€¯¾¾°n°¾ ¾f°€€ °n ° ¯  °fn¯ °¾  ° €€ ° ¾f  f   ½°¾ °   f°€¾  °fn¯ °¾  ¾f° ½°¾ n €  ¾f¯ €€ °n n %%€ .

°¾°  n¾f°½ ¾°¾f ½¾ n f° ½°¾  €¾f¯ €€ °n ¯ f°n   ¾ ½¾°¾f½½° °€€ °n ¾f ¾f¯  € €€ °n °  °fn¯ °¾¾° °nf °° € ¾ ½¾°¾¾ff½½  €€ nf° n°¾  °n ¾€ ½ f ½ ¾f¯f  ½ f    ½ ¾¾ ¯½nf° °  nf¾ ¾  n°¾  °n ¾f ¾f¯ °–f   €€ n¾€ ½ f€f° °fn¯ ° %%f nf –f ¾½°  %% ½ f nn f¾ ¾ ¾f°   ¾° ¯f°°€n  €€ n€¯  f € ½ f  %%¾½ – ° ff  n ½° f° ½f¾f° n¾ f°¾fn°¾ f¾f f€  ½ f¾ n¯½    f f¾€f °   ° °fn ¾¾n f–¾f° nf¾ ¾€fn°°   ½ f ¾f f  ¾  °ff°f¯ff D°°€° f f¾  f° ¾    –¾f°  f  ¾°   ½ f ff  °½f° °   °  °fn¯ °  ½½ f½½fn ¾° ° € °  °fn¯ °f¾ ¾° ½¾°¾ ½f  –¾f° f  ¾°    ½ f f   f¾f °ff¾ –¾f° f  ¾ @ f ¾ °n €f¾f°– nf¾ ° °  °fn¯ °½ ¾ °– –¾f° f  ¾°   ½ f f¾°   ¯f f° n¾ €  ¾°  %%J °f°n¾ ½ f ff¾½f¾¾ ° ¾f°  ½ f ° ¾¾  ¾f¾f°–½¾°  .

° °9 n ¯nf° ¾ ¾.

    nn°¾½ n f¾  ff°€nf° n¾ ¾¾ n°° – °° ¾¾ ½ f °nf¾  ½f °¾f ¾ ½ f   °€nf° f¾¾f°  ½ f ° ¾¾f°    ° ¾f   ½ f°–n  %%-½n °–¾nf° n¯¯ °n n°° ° f°nf€ ¾ ½ f    ¾ nf¾ ¾  ¯f°°f€€ n  ¾n ½ f°n ½n °–¾f  ° –€°f½ ½ f € ¾f @ nf¾ ¾f f n¯½  ¾f°  ½ °    f¾°€ ½ f€  .

   n   %%¾nn    f° n½¾ n°f¾¯f  °f €D 9  f–¯f° f¾  ½ .

  f °f¾f ¾ ½ f n¯ ¾f° f¯  °   €€€¯ °½¾ n°€ fn¾ °  °–n°°f°n €  ½ f $ ½ nnf° n¯¯ °n f€  f €¾ ½ f ½ nf¾ f f¯° °€n ¯ °f ½ f  f f n  ¾f– ° f f€  ½ f€f¾f  fnf¾°€n f n¯¯ °n ¯ °€   ½ f ¾f   ¾ @¾   ° ¾f ##¾ ½ f  f¾ n° ¾f # # f°  ¾ ¾  °¾f # #¾f¾ ½ f  f ¾f #.

#   €€ n¾f €¾¾f ##   ¾ ° ¾¾n°f¾½ °  ¾f #.

#    ¾n¯¯° f¾ ° f –f   n°¾%f%f° € ° f.

f°–f9° f   f¾f n½ ¯   °¯ ° €€ n n¯½¾  ¯ °€f– °¯ °¾ f° ½f°– ¯°#¾¾ff @¾ f¾ ¾ ¾  ° ½ f f° °¾½fn f°  f¾¾ ¾ °– ½   f  f¾ °½ f° f– °¯ °¾ f°f¾  °½f¯ °€f°f¯°f¾¾ff J °nfnf  f   f¯°½f f– °¯ °¾ f°f¾€°  ¾€ ¯°#¾¾ff  .f¾ ¾n  ¾f ¾  ½ ¾ °½¾°¾f  €¾n¾°¾  ° ¾¾ n¯f ¾f° ½ ¾¾½¾°f €€ n  %fnf°  ¾½ n f¯ ° f f  f°¾fn°¾¯f °    °f€ ¾  ½ f  °f €f©f¾f° . f°   ° nn¯½¾  ¯ °f¾– ° nf¯   ½ f ¾½    ¯¾€     ¯ °f¾°f  nf¾ €°° ½f¯ °€€f¯°€ ¯°¾# ¾ff @  € ° f f  fn° f°f¯ ° ¯ °f¾ –  f€ ¾ ½ f  @¾f¯ ° ¯ °f¾°  ¾½ n  f¾ €€ n € ½   °–n    .

 ¯f° °½ f° nn °–f¯ ° ¯ °  °¯ °n   f– °¯ °¾ f° €½f°–¯ ¯°#¾¾ff  °°–¯nf¯¾fff€   ¯ ° @  f¯ ° ¯ °f¾   f f¾ ¾  f¾°n   ½ f€ff ¾ €€ n€¯  f  € ½ ff° f ½ f  ¯f°¾°½ f°€ ½   € ¾ ½ ff¾¾¾f°n € f°¾f°–nf¾ €f°¾fn°½f¾f° n¾ nf°  ¾½ n f¯ ° f€€ n¾n f°¾fn°¾  °f€ ¾ ½ f  # %#J °f° ¾°–¾f ¾ ½ f  f ¯½f¾f ¾f ¯½f ½ f €  ½€ ¾n ¯½fn   ½ f n  ¾  ° f¯f° J¾ .


½f° f¾  f  ½ f €€ n  f ¯½f  –¾f°f¾°f ¯½f ½ f J °  €f€9ff¯ °  ¯½f ½ f ½   –°f –¾f°f¯fnf ¾¯ ¾€€n - °fn¯ °€f¾    n   ¾n   n    %nn °–n¯¯°f  €€ n€ ½ f¾f ¾f ¾n¯½    f f° f –¾°  ½ f ¾f f  ¾     –¾f° f  ¾fnn ° ff  ° °–¾   ½ f€ff ¯ nf°¾¾ €€ nf – °   ° ° f¯¾¾ .

°n  ¾¾ f¾ f°– €f €f°n f€ ¾¾f°n € n f¾  ½ f @ nf° .

°€9°nf¾ ¯½   ¾  f°n f½ ¾°  n°–¯f f  °¾f°n °f¾½ n€ ½  € °n f¾ °n¯½   nff¾f¾ ¯½    n°f ° f  €n¯°f €€ °n °fnn f°n  ½¾°¾€ n °¾nf¾ f°n °  nf¾¾   € ¾ n €°n  ½ ½f°€ ½  ¾½f ° °n €n¯½f°n   nf¾ ½ f @  ¾°f¾   °n f¾¾ €€ n f€  ½ f€ n°  nf¾¾¾ f° nf°½°¾¯ ° ¯½¾ €°° n¯½f°n € °n f¾  f  °n f¾ €€ n f° ½ ¾°n°f °°– °n f¾f   ½°¾ € €€ °n  °  n  °– nf¾f –f  °f¯°  J   ¾°f¾  – n  n¯½ °¾f°¾ f€   ½ f€f" °f°€f–nf °–f¾f– n  n¯½ °¾f°€¯f°  € f°  ¾  ¾f°n ¯f €f°° ° ¾f € °– f¾  f  –¾f°fnn –n ½ ¾    °f€  ½ f€¾f ° n –f¾ n°€   .

° f°f°¾f°n .

f°nf°   ¾°f¾   –¾€f ½ n  °f°¾ f€  ½ f€ n" °f°¾ ¯    n   n   %%   %%     %%   n  °f €¾¾f  ½ ° f¯f #-D   ¾  f° °°€ ¯½f n° ½ f°– f nf  n°¾  f° °– ° f°€    °f f€nf° f  °  °f €ff°f ¯f°f f°¾f ° f .  f°f¾°–  ¾¾ f¾  f½ ¾°¾¾f°¾°©° ¯fnn °f¾f–nf¯ f¯f– ¾€¯ °¾ €¯ n ¾  °f€  ½ f€ ¾f "f¾  f¾–¾f°fnn –n¾ °€n f    °f€  ½ f€  °fn¯ °n f°–f    °€ ½n ¾¾€  ¯°f°€f¯°¾°n¯½   €   ½ f  °fff¯ .

 n ¾ –f° f¾ ½ f   9 ½¾ °f°n - €f¯f @  °f°n ¾ €f½  €¾¯°¾ f€ n  ½ f¾  f  –f°¾  °  f€  ½f°€  °f°n  nf¾   ° °°° ½ f°–  –f°¾f¾ ½ f ¯f ¾      ½ n  °f° € f¾   f° €n f°°¯ € f¾f° f¾½ ¾°fnf   ¾f¯ n °f°f¾n f°–¾n     fnn –¾ @ ¾ –¾¾f¾   °f€  ½ f€ ¾f  °¯f ffff¾f.

½ f –n f° ° ¾fn    D°°€° f f¾  f f f °¾f°n ½n€€f €€fn– ¾ ° ¯ – °n¾¾%fn ¾%n f° ¯ – °n¾¾% ¾%n f¾f ¾ f°  n   °€n f€  ½€ ¾ n¾   °€ €f €– ¾€fnf¾  ¯°   f €€n °  ¾ n¾f€   ½  .

f¯f f f €©ff   ¾°f¾   f  ¯f°¾  ° f€   ½ f€  ¾–°–¾ ¾nf "D° .f.°fn f.

fD ½ ¾ ¾    f°  f¾° f °n ¾°¾ € ¾¾n   nf   ¾   € ¾¾ f¾  f f ¾   °f€  ½ f€ ¾  ¾  ° – °° ¾ ¾  nf¾  –€ ½ ° °¾€ n f¾ ¯f°nf¯n¯½ °¾f° f¾° ¾° D° J¯ °#¾.

¯½ °¾f°n €f¯f°  ¾   ½ ° °¾f – nf¯n¯½ °¾f° @¾–fnn ¾°° f€¯f°f° °f ¯  °°© nf¾°– ff¾¾¾f°  ¯f° € f¾f¯ °  °f°n  n¯½ °¾f°f° ¾n f¯ ° ¯ °f ¾ €€ nf€ ¯f°¾¾f°¾°©  €    ¾¾nn¯ °–¾ °© ¾    ¯½ ¾f  € °f°n ½f¯ °f¾n¯½ °¾f°  %% n°€ ° f.

f¾ ¾n ½ ¾  €€ n€ ½ ff¾°  J  ¾n f°.

°fn –f°¯f f€ n¯¯ °n ¯ °€¾n  ½ f¾f° °fn¯ ° ¯f   f€  ¯f  ° ° ¾¾f €€  °° °°f½½ f¾   ½ f ¾f° %f%  f°°–°°€n  ¾°–f ¯ fn  ½ ff ¾ €€ n  % %f€€ n ½ ¾½ f°€f° °fn¯ °¾ ½ f f°°–  ° ¾€€     °   %n%f€€ nf°– ½ –  –f°f fn °n ° f° °fn¯ °¾  ½ f  % %f€€ nf°½ °f €€  ½°¾¯ °°n ° ¾½ n€f°€€ °n n¯¯ f–f°¾ f° °fn¯ °¾ ½ f  % %f€€ nf°° ¾–f°  –f½n °– ¯ ° ¾½ n€f°¾n– ½ –  –f°  f  ½ °f €€  ½°¾¯ °f¾f€ ¾f  f° f°¾n° ¾–f°  –f½n °– ¯ ¯f °¾   .

   ¾n¾   %%%9.

%     .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful