contd ...

    KUMARASAAMY's LOGIC ERROR No.2
Here only we can explain the core matter of the main error what we called as LOGIC ERROR No.2 which is explained in nut shell manner as follows.
He would have pointed out the BANK LOAN as LOAN INCOME for just calculating the genuineness of purchase of ASSETS

In the formula he used to calculate the Percentile Disproportion on Income
he used the following formula

Value of DISPROPORTIONATE ASSETS = [Total Assets - Total source of money]
Value of Net Income =  [Total SOURCE of MONEY - Bank Loans]

Percentile DA value= Disproportionate assets  value  x 100
                                                         ------------------------------------------------ %
                                            Net Income

Here only one must understands the real and more accurate difference between "Total Income" and "Net Income" .We must definitely differentiate the Total Income and Net Income
Total Income is used for calculating the DA value. But while we go for percentile calculation then we must use the "Net Income" term for percentage calculation.
"Net Income" is nothing but the Total Income minus Bank Loan. This is "Net Income"which means the real income without any liability such as Bank loans etc..

Here Kumaarasaamy missed to use this real thing and knowingly or unknowingly used the erroneous formula as per page 913.
 So if he would have used the correct formula 
Percentile DA value= Disproportionate assets  value  x 100
                                                         ------------------------------------------------
                                            Net Income
then the out come will be as follows if you put the values in the above said formula
-         [Rs.2,82,36,812 ] x 100
         ----------------------------                                 =  17.02 %

        [Rs.34,76,65,654] - [Rs.18,17,46,000]    
         which is higher than  the permissible limit of 10%

So someone or SC only decide this calculation by assuming the LOGIC ERROR which is misinterpreting  the values for "Total Income" in the place of "NET income" .
 Why the Judge made this slippery LOGIC error and Did he notice to assume this point before calculating the percentage DA value and whether it is going to impact the entire verdict in opposite direction..? Only SC will answer it
 based on above facts there is also some scenarios as in the LOGIC ERROR No.1 
Here let us see the scenario No.1  after rectifying this LOGIC ERROR No.2
                                         scenario No.1

[37,59, 02, 466] -[25,01,65,654] / 
[25,01,65,654 ]-[8,42,46,000] 
=125736812/165919654=75.78%

compare this error with the percentage worked out in the LOGIC ERROR No.1 wherein the percentile is worked out as 50.26% But here  it is  75.78%

Diagram shows the error during LOGIC ERROR1

 For this LOGIC ERROR No.2  we can also see the                                   SCENERIO No.2
    after rectifying this LOGIC ERROR NO.2 
[37,59, 02, 466] -[21 26 65 654 ] / 
[21 26 65 654 ]-[4 67 46 000] =163236812/165919654=98.38%
         COMPARISONS OF ERRORS                          

compare this error with the percentage worked out in the LOGIC ERROR No.1 wherein the percentile is worked out as 77.0% But here  it is  98.38%

Diagram below shows the error during LOGIC ERROR1
Earlier percentile as per following diagram comes as 77.0% we can view and work out  this using following diagram.

 

                                              Back to HOME