"Plea of Controversial Immunity of our legislators are still misconceived." - Rejected by Delhi High Court.

As per the basic principles of Laws of Contract in our land, a demand or proposal is made and accepted by the lawmakers and promises are given in public as well as in the parliament or legislative bodies to carry out certain action as it is promised, but the same does not happen at all.It becomes a breach of contract, if it is a business transaction or general deal or agreement, but the case is different, if it is a promise given by our parliamentarian or legislators, because they are immune and no liability stick to them for any breach of promise or contract in our system...because there is neither any statutory provisions in our legal system to enforce such promises nor any such statutory enactment like right to recall such the lawmakers, except to wait till next election. Such a similar unfortunate case has been recently adjudicated by our Delhi High Court, where the local resident had asked to have the court direction with a view to enforcing the statements made by the finance minister of Government of National Capital Territory (GNCT) in the Budget speech for the year 2003-2004 for a cut in stamp duty on property transfer. Taking a judicious approach in this legal controversy, the Hon. Justice Mr. S Muralidhar at last rejected this prayer of petitioner to issue a mandamus to the GNCTD and the Government of India, in order to enforce a statement made by the finance minister of GNCTD to the State Legislative Assemble in 2003-04 followed by the statement made in the Parliament by the Union minister for urban affairs, stating in his verdict that "Court cannot direct for enforcement for the promises of the lawmakers made in the Parliament or Assembly unless a statutory provision or notification is issued for the same"