eCharcha.Com   Support eCharcha.Com. Click on sponsor ad to shop online!

Advertise Here

Go Back   eCharcha.Com > LifeStyle > Life Abroad

Notices

Life Abroad All about life away from home

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 25th, 2005, 09:53 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

suggestion: we don't have a legal forum here on echarcha, so maybe it would be a good idea to create one. i didnt know under which topic to post this message-

i'm having a bit of a messy situation at work i can't go into details about, but suffice it to say that its VERY similar to what's happening here, just that the case hasn't reached trial stage yet, so the courts havent given their verdict

however, the situation is bound to get messy in the future because choice of law, forum etc. is going to complicate things beyond measure.

some food for thought:

US court overrules SC, triggers row
TImes of INdia (oct 23 '05)
By Dhananjay Mahapatra/TNN



New Delhi: In what could trigger a major diplomatic wrangle between India and the US, a New York family court has virtually nullified an order of the Supreme Court of India in a custody battle relating to two great grandchildren of former Andhra Pradesh CM N T Rama Rao.
The supreme court had directed that the children be produced before it so as to ascertain their views on custody. The NY court’s refusal to send the kids to India hasn’t gone down well with the apex court. Upset with the order of the foreign subordinate court, SC has asked solicitor-general G E Vahanvati to find out “if diplomatic arrangements can be made so that there is no scope for a superior court’s order in one country to be ignored by a court of another country’’.
Vahanvati is understood to have shot off a letter to foreign secretary Shyam Saran to initiate action on the remarks of the bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat, which observed on Friday that “it needs no emphasis that the effect of the court’s order—more particularly a superior court—and its enforceability should not be left to be decided by the perception of a court in another country’’.
The case relates to NTR’s son Nandamuri Jayakrishna and his wife Padmaja seeking custody of their grandchildren—sons of their daughter Kumudini, after she was allegedly driven to death by her NRI husband Srinath Prasad in October 2000. In January 2004, a Chennai court even convicted Srinath of abetting the death and sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment. He has since appealed against the order.
The grandparents, after first losing the custody battle in SC in 2001, moved a lower court in 2003 alleging that the children were not safe with a person who had driven their mother to death. The lower court ruled it didn’t have jurisdiction in the matter. Subsequently, the AP high court said the lower court did indeed have jurisdiction to adjudicate on the case. An aggrieved Srinath challenged this order in SC, which on March 28, 2005, directed him to produce the children in Justice Arijit Pasayat’s chamber on April 25, 2005.
Srinath lives with his children in New York but has been attending court hearings in India.
In 2004, Srinath Prasad moved the local family court which appointed Nancy Dunbar as the law guardian of his two children—eight-year-old Neel Krishna Prasad and ten-yearold Jay Viraj Prasad—both of whom were born in the US.
Faced with the supreme court’s March 28 order, when Srinath moved the NY family court for permission to take the two minors to India, the law guardian opposed the plea.
The family court, after scrutinising the SC order, directed Srinath on April 11, 2005 “not to produce the minor children before the supreme court of India on April 25, 2005, or on any subsequent date...” The court said it was in the best interest of the children that “they not be thrust into a lawsuit commenced for their custody by maternal relatives in India and that to do so would place the children's stability and emotional health at risk”.
The SC initiated contempt proceedings for not producing the children but what upset it was the audacity with which a subordinate court of a foreign country had undermined its order. “If such a situation is permitted to continue, it will have large ramifications not only so far as this case is concerned, but also other cases,'' the bench said, adding that “in essence, what transpires is that the court in the US has virtually rendered our order inoperative”. On October 21, when the SC asked solicitor-general G E Vahanvati to take diplomatic steps to uphold its supremacy in the standoff, Srinath made a plea to go to the US to help one of his children attend a camp in which the parents' presence was mandated.
Justice Pasayat allowed this but asked the solicitor-general to “take steps to inform the embassy in the US that the petitioner is permitted to stay in that country till November 20 and in case the embassy does not get information that he has returned to India by then, steps shall be taken to declare him an absconder’’. Srinath's mother, meanwhile, has been taking care of the two children in New York.


Oct 2000

NTR’s granddaughter Kumudini dies under suspicious circumstances

2001

NTR’s son approaches SC for custody of daughter Kumudini’s sons. SC dismisses case. Grants custody to son-in-law Srinath

2003

Srinath accused of abetting Kumudini’s murder. NTR’s son moves city court in Hyderabad for custody. Court says it has no jurisdiction in case

2004

Srinath convicted, but appeals. In May, Srinath moves NY family court, gets custody of children

2005

Jan: AP HC says city court had jurisdiction in case; Mar: Srinath challenges HC order in SC. Court seeks audience with children; April: NY court says children to remain in US

21 Oct 2005

SC wants “diplomatic arrangement” to maintain supremacy of its order

SC fears larger ramifications

Last edited by lawgirl707; October 25th, 2005 at 09:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old October 25th, 2005, 10:02 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

oh, and in connection with this post, i have to educate you all about Community Property too. Some states in the US are what's called "Community Property" (CP) states. such as California, for eg. meaning, if you get married here or anywhere else but settle down in Calif, at time of divorce (god forbid it should happen) everything is 50-50.

9 states in the US of A are CP states: Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. also Puerto Rico.

which brings us to why people in California sign pre-nuptial agreements. but more about that later.

feel free to ask me any questions re. this topic and i'll happily answer them.

cheerio.

conclusion - get married and stay married but in New York. dont ever come to CA!!!

Last edited by lawgirl707; October 25th, 2005 at 10:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old October 25th, 2005, 11:39 AM
28virgo's Avatar
28virgo 28virgo is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,350
28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

This will become a diplomatic/legal row.. Technically the lower court in the US has no locus standi in the matter.. the article also states that the father tried to move the court to give him permission to take his kids to India but the legal guardian moved the court to stop him from doing so...

The court clearly ruled regarding the welfare of the children, without looking at the whole picture and not taking into account the jusridiction/superiority of the Higher court and the contention of the Appellant..

I believe ultimately the court will have to overturn its decision and be cognizant of the superior courts authority..

just my 2 cents.. I might be totally wrong..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old October 25th, 2005, 11:55 AM
rameshp's Avatar
rameshp rameshp is offline
the Centre Right Indian!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 4,804
rameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond reputerameshp has a reputation beyond repute
Question Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawgirl707
oh, and in connection with this post, i have to educate you all about Community Property too. Some states in the US are what's called "Community Property" (CP) states. such as California, for eg. meaning, if you get married here or anywhere else but settle down in Calif, at time of divorce (god forbid it should happen) everything is 50-50.

9 states in the US of A are CP states: Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. also Puerto Rico.

which brings us to why people in California sign pre-nuptial agreements. but more about that later.

feel free to ask me any questions re. this topic and i'll happily answer them.

cheerio.

conclusion - get married and stay married but in New York. dont ever come to CA!!!
i thought u were in entertainment law?
__________________


Captain R Harshan
Ashok Chakra, 2 PARA SF,
Indian Army.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old October 25th, 2005, 10:01 PM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28virgo
This will become a diplomatic/legal row.. Technically the lower court in the US has no locus standi in the matter..
you probably meant jurisdiction (over the case)? locus standi is standing to sue, meaning if i have a concrete personal stake in the outcome of the matter, then i have standing (known as locus standi in india) to sue.

(of course there are exceptions to this rule, such as class action suits or public interest litigation, for instance)

yeah i'm waiting to see what comes out of this... it'll be interesting to follow up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rameshp
i thought u were in entertainment law?
yes, a lot of my work involves the entertainment industry. entertainment law is not a specialty per se, just deals with all the legal aspects/disputes arising out of anything related to the field. such as contracts, negotiations, employment law, intellectual property (copyrights etc.), distribution/broadcasting licenses and so forth. since i mainly deal with people, quite often a divorce case will come up, and no lawyer will ever turn a client away...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old October 25th, 2005, 10:12 PM
aby_baby's Avatar
aby_baby aby_baby is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 580
aby_baby is on a distinguished road
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Question to Law girl, Vakil Babu and other lawyer folks here. Since the kids are presumably US citizens (having born in US), does the Indian Supreme court have rights to give custody of Minor US citizens to Indians (even though they are relatives). I am sure when the laws were framed they didnt think of all these inter country disputes that might come in.
__________________
Is this really needed??
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old October 26th, 2005, 05:25 AM
28virgo's Avatar
28virgo 28virgo is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,350
28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawgirl707
you probably meant jurisdiction (over the case)? locus standi is standing to sue, meaning if i have a concrete personal stake in the outcome of the matter, then i have standing (known as locus standi in india) to sue.

(of course there are exceptions to this rule, such as class action suits or public interest litigation, for instance)
Yes , I meant jurisdiction of the court and used the term "Locus Standi (Latin for "place to stand"), in law, the right to bring an action" in that regard...

Last edited by 28virgo; October 26th, 2005 at 05:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old October 26th, 2005, 06:21 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs up Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28virgo
Yes , I meant jurisdiction of the court and used the term "Locus Standi (Latin for "place to stand"), in law, the right to bring an action" in that regard...
i don't mean to be nitpicky, and yes, you're absolutely right as far as the meaning of locus standi is concerned, as you've said yourself: its the right to bring an action. so its not the right to adjudicate on one, and only a litigant (i.e. party who is filing suit/suing) has (or doesn't have) locus standi to sue, not a court. i dont know if i'm making any sense, but its a matter of terminology. as a lawyer one eventually tends to have a problem with every punctuation mark even, and i hate myself for that. so take no offense.

as far as this case is concerned, i'm not too well aware of the facts (such as the citizenship/domicile of the parties to the suit as well as the children, etc.: normally these are questions i would ask before i advised anyone) so i think that if the parties were indian citizens, and there's a final order from the Supreme Court of India, then definitely the SC will prevail.

enforcement, however, is another issue altogether... its practically impossible to enforce an indian judgment in a foreign country (to be honest, its impossible to enforce an indian judgment in india even!)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old October 26th, 2005, 06:28 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by aby_baby
Question to Law girl, Vakil Babu and other lawyer folks here. Since the kids are presumably US citizens (having born in US), does the Indian Supreme court have rights to give custody of Minor US citizens to Indians (even though they are relatives). I am sure when the laws were framed they didnt think of all these inter country disputes that might come in.
if the kids are us citizens, they wont have a say until they are adults. because until they reach the age of maturity, their lawful guardian's domicile/residence will prevail. but yes, the degree of relations matter while handing over guardianship, so in that case, the father prevails because he is closer in relation to the kids v. the grandparents or whoever else. its gets complicated from here on, because the burden of proving that he is not an ideal guardian lies on the challenger and so forth. if both parents were indian citizens and the Indian Sup Ct. adjudicated on the matter already (final judgment/decree) then that prevails as i said in the earlier post. but enforcement is an issue.

when laws were framed they did think of international disputes. thats why we have treaties, executive agreements and arbitration. treaties/exec agmts can be amended from time to time to conform to the latest developments in law, in the signatory countries.

i'm still breaking my head over this (for the case at hand, where facts are totally different from this one) so as i learn more about it, i will share.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old October 26th, 2005, 07:23 AM
28virgo's Avatar
28virgo 28virgo is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,350
28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawgirl707
i don't mean to be nitpicky, and yes, you're absolutely right as far as the meaning of locus standi is concerned, as you've said yourself: its the right to bring an action. so its not the right to adjudicate on one, and only a litigant (i.e. party who is filing suit/suing) has (or doesn't have) locus standi to sue, not a court. i dont know if i'm making any sense, but its a matter of terminology. as a lawyer one eventually tends to have a problem with every punctuation mark even, and i hate myself for that. so take no offense.

as far as this case is concerned, i'm not too well aware of the facts (such as the citizenship/domicile of the parties to the suit as well as the children, etc.: normally these are questions i would ask before i advised anyone) so i think that if the parties were indian citizens, and there's a final order from the Supreme Court of India, then definitely the SC will prevail.

enforcement, however, is another issue altogether... its practically impossible to enforce an indian judgment in a foreign country (to be honest, its impossible to enforce an indian judgment in india even!)

It will be interesting to watch what transpires as its the Supreme Court of India that has issued this edict... Now that the government too is involved (since proabably a letter showing our displeasure has already been shot to the US counterpart), US will be faced with a conundrum of sorts regarding further course of action...

Btw did you ever practice in India? was it in SC or lower courts in a state? I am not a lawyer but do remember interacting with some from Little & Co, Mulla & Mulla etc which are in Bombay and a lot of Senior Advocates in Delhi since One of my sibling is AOR in SC..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old October 26th, 2005, 09:43 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28virgo
It will be interesting to watch what transpires as its the Supreme Court of India that has issued this edict... Now that the government too is involved (since proabably a letter showing our displeasure has already been shot to the US counterpart), US will be faced with a conundrum of sorts regarding further course of action...

Btw did you ever practice in India? was it in SC or lower courts in a state? I am not a lawyer but do remember interacting with some from Little & Co, Mulla & Mulla etc which are in Bombay and a lot of Senior Advocates in Delhi since One of my sibling is AOR in SC..
yup, it sure will... but who knows how long it'll take considering our history of having excessive time lags!

yes, i did practice law in india, but was never a litigator worked for a law firm in BBay, but did only corporate law and entertainment law (admitted to practice in MH and Goa though - so eligible to argue before the BBay High Court. once i stop being lazy i'll work on getting that Supreme Court license as well.)

what a small world, i know plenty of people from Mulla as well as Little. Many of my batchmates still work there!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old October 26th, 2005, 09:49 AM
28virgo's Avatar
28virgo 28virgo is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,350
28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute28virgo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Last I heard, aajkal straight practice bhi nahi karne dete in Supreme Court.. Pahle kisi senior ke yahan Junior Advocate ban ke 2-3 saal katne padte hain aur uske baad u become eligible.. is that correct..

waise it was fun to watch those juniors carrying "sir's" briefs and doing case law research till wee hours of morning for "Sir's" cases!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old October 28th, 2005, 07:48 AM
lawgirl707's Avatar
lawgirl707 lawgirl707 is offline
honest lawyer ;-)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 988
lawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond reputelawgirl707 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28virgo
Last I heard, aajkal straight practice bhi nahi karne dete in Supreme Court.. Pahle kisi senior ke yahan Junior Advocate ban ke 2-3 saal katne padte hain aur uske baad u become eligible.. is that correct..

waise it was fun to watch those juniors carrying "sir's" briefs and doing case law research till wee hours of morning for "Sir's" cases!
arre aisa kya? i had no idea! all this time i was thinking i just have to take the "advocate on record" examination and i'm eligible to take it if i'm admitted in another jurisdictioN!!!! but good that you've brought it up, i'll definitely look into it now.

yeah juniors are in a vrey very sad state of affairs out there. its almost one slight level up from those poor lawyers on the streets of the small causes court in bbay who hound you with "affidavit, affidavit".. gloomy side of the profession i feel very sad when i see such things. but then again, i feel sad if i see anyone with a small tear in their socks even..

i think i shd stop being a lawyer and take sanyaas.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old October 28th, 2005, 08:09 AM
dhurandhar's Avatar
dhurandhar dhurandhar is offline
Dhureshvar Dhuracharya
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 13,276
dhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond reputedhurandhar has a reputation beyond repute
Re: US court overrules Supreme Court, triggers row

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawgirl707

i think i shd stop being a lawyer and take sanyaas.
piece of cake....wear saffron and put that bugger Deep-ache Chopra out of business
__________________
Hum woh hai jo vidhaata ka bhagya likhte hai
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Something rotten in Allahabad HC: Supreme Court raniraja Indian Politics 2 November 27th, 2010 09:39 AM
Supreme Court of India Comes Down On Bloggers echarcha Computing 28 February 28th, 2009 08:54 AM
Ban on SIMI to continue: Supreme Court echarcha Taaza Khabar - Current news 8 August 7th, 2008 05:23 AM
Supreme Court lifts ban on Jodhaa Akbar echarcha Films 0 March 4th, 2008 01:59 PM
Karishma's TV serial stayed by High Court. (Update - Supreme Court okays serial) echarcha Films 16 July 21st, 2003 02:25 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Site Copyright © eCharcha.Com 2000-2012.