For all the Latest Sports News News, Cricket News News, Download News Nation Android and iOS Mobile Apps. New Delhi: Former India captains Mohammed Azharuddin and Anil Kumble found a “father figure” in Ajit Wadekar. The legendary player mentored struggling captain and a stressed leg spinner during his days of international cricket. After prolonged illness Wadekar, 77, passed away in Mumbai on Wednesday. It was under Wadekar that struggling captain Azharuddin, got a second chance from 1993 to 1996 having lost Test series in New Zealand, England and Australia ALSO READ | Ajit Wadekar: Man who made Indian captaincy coveted“such an iconic person..deeply saddened by his demise!! Sir was a father figure for me.. May his soul rest in peace! My Heartfelt Condolences to the family,” Azharuddin tweeted. Wadekar was a blessing for Kumble after getting dropped post 1990 tour of England. His comeback coincided with Wadekar’s entry as manager during the 1992-93 tour of South Africa. Till his retirement in 2008, Kumble was never dropped for the next 16 years. Kumble tweeted “Deeply saddened by the passing away of #AjitWadekar He was more than a coach to the entire team – a father figure and a shrewd tactician. My heartfelt condolences to his family and loved ones. He will be missed. Thank you Sir, for the confidence shown in my ability!”. Famous cricketer Bishan Singh Bedi also praised Wadekar. “V sad news-Ajit Wadekar passing away-only Indn Capt to win 3 series in a row-2 away 1 at home-ALW was good contemporary-we had differences of (sic) opinion but always respected glory of (sic) Crkt-fine batsman & great close in catch-served Indn Crkt w/aplomb as player/Selectr/Coach-RIP Jeetu!” wrote Bedi on his twitter page. Wadekar was a “tough character” for Sanjay Manjrekar as coach. Earlier, Majrekar had tweeted a video of Wadekar in cricket gears one last time during a charity match at the Shivaji Park Gymkhana in Mumbai. ALSO READ | Remove all-rounder tag from Hardik Pandya, says Harbhajan Singh “Ajit Wadekar’s impact on Indian cricket is huge. His contemporaries worshipped him, such was his aura. Found him to be a tough character as coach. Exceptional Indian cricketer… RIP Sir.” tweeted Sanjay Manjrekar.
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has overruled the Court of Appeal in the latest ruling in the matter of Errol Campbell v Janette Narine where the appellant, Errol Campbell, was represented by Attorneys at Law Sanjeev Datadin and Charles Ramson Jr MP. The matter concerned the validity of an agreement of sale for a property at a significant undervalue executed in December 1992 by Campbell’s mother-in-law, Mrs Feinmesser, who was the property owner, and Ms Narine (the Respondent) while Mrs Feinmesser was in hospital. Before the action could be filed Ms Feinmesser died so Mr Campbell acted in his capacity as executor of her estate and commenced legal proceedings.After a trial in the High Court, the judge hearing the case, Justice George, ordered that the agreement be rescinded on the legal grounds of undue influence and failure of consideration. The matter was appealed by Ms Narine to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal in a majority ruling by Justices Carl Singh and B S Roy disagreed with Justice George and ordered specific performance of the agreement.Charles Ramson JrAgreeing with Justice George and the minority ruling in the Court of Appeal by Justice Cummings-Edwards, the CCJ re-affirmed the position of the law on undue influence and held that the focus was on the extent of trust and confidence reposed by Mrs Feinmesser in Mrs Narine coupled with the under value sale which was not readily explicable by the women’s relationship. Once such a suspicion has been aroused the evidential burden shifted to Mrs Narine in order for her to rebut the inference of undue influence to show that the transaction was the spontaneous act of the donor acting under circumstances which enabled her to exercise an independent will and which could justify the court in holding that the gift was the result of free exercise of the donor’s will. Relying on Lord Evershed in Zamet v Hyman  1 WLR 1442 where it was made clear that it is necessary to establish that the gift was made as a result of “full, free and informed thought about it”. At the trial, Justice George ruled that Mrs Narine failed to disprove the inference of undue influence. In addition, the trial judge after having heard the testimony of Ms Narine held that she disbelieved that Mrs Narine paid any deposit on the signed agreement despite the agreement containing a term that the signing of the agreement by Ms Feinmesser acknowledged receipt of the payment of the deposit leading Justice George to rule that there was lack of consideration required for the validity of the agreement.Despite the majority ruling in the Court of Appeal, the CCJ held that there was no sufficient basis to interfere with the trial judge’s ruling since the finding of undue influence is a finding of fact.The CCJ noted with dismay the sloth in the judicial system which saw the proceedings being instituted in 1996 and judgement delivered in 2006 some ten years later. Further, some six years later the appeal was heard and it took two years for the judgment to be delivered by the Court of Appeal. Interestingly, the matter was commenced by Mr Campbell’s Attorney-at-law Charles R. Ramson (Sr) and was finally completely by Sanjeev Datadin and the son of Charles R. Ramson (Sr), Charles S. Ramson (Jr). Ms Narine, the respondent, who lost the appeal with costs awarded against her as a result was represented by R Poonai, C Satram and M Satram.