https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72870 A detention order is not invalid merely because the Tamil and English versions of the grounds of detention contain a variation; the decisive question is whether the discrepancy is consequential and whether real prejudice is shown in making an effective representation. Here, the difference was found immaterial and no prejudice was established, so the challenge failed. A separate challenge based on alleged non-dispatch of materials to the Advisory Board or Central Government also failed because the record showed the necessary materials were sent and no specific withheld document was identified. The detention was therefore upheld and the proceedings challenging it were rejected. en-us Mon, 13 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72870 A detention order is not invalid merely because the Tamil and English versions of the grounds of detention contain a variation; the decisive question is whether the discrepancy is consequential and whether real prejudice is shown in making an effective representation. Here, the difference was found immaterial and no prejudice was established, so the challenge failed. A separate challenge based on alleged non-dispatch of materials to the Advisory Board or Central Government also failed because the record showed the necessary materials were sent and no specific withheld document was identified. The detention was therefore upheld and the proceedings challenging it were rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72870