In law, a legal person is any person or “thing” (less ambiguous, any legal entity) that can do the things that an ordinary person can normally do legally – such as entering into contracts, suing and being sued, owning property, etc.    The reason for the term “legal person” is that some legal persons are not persons: corporations and corporations are legally “persons” (they can legally do most of the things an ordinary person can do), but they are clearly not people in the ordinary sense. In legal proceedings concerning animals, animals have the status of “legal person” and humans have a legal obligation to act as “loco parentis” towards animal welfare, as a parent has done towards minor children. A court that ruled in the Animal Welfare Board of India vs Nagaraja case in 2014 ordered that animals also have the right to the fundamental right to liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, i.e. the right to life, personal liberty and the right to die with dignity (passive euthanasia). In another case, a court in the state of Uttarakhand ordered that animals have the same rights as humans. In another cow smuggling case, the Supreme Court of Punjab and Haryana ordered that “the entire animal kingdom, including bird and water species, has an `independent legal personality with the corresponding rights, duties and duties of a living person` and that humans be `loco parentis`, while animal welfare standards, veterinary treatment, feeding and shelter are established, for example, carts pulled by animals can have no more than four people. and carrier animals must not be loaded beyond the established limits and these limits must be halved if the animals are to carry the load on a slope.  In Indian law, “shebaitship” is the property belonging to the deity or idol as a “legal entity.” People who are destined to act in the name of divinity are called “shebait.” A shebait acts as the guardian or guardian of the deity to protect the right of the deity and fulfill the legal duties of the deity. Shebait is similar to a trustee in case the deity or temple has a legally registered trust or legal entity.
According to Hindu law, goods given or offered in the form of rituals or gifts, etc., absolutely belong to the deity and not to the Shebait. Case studies include “Profulla Chrone Requitte vs Satya Chorone Requitte, AIR 1979 SC 1682 (1686): (1979) 3 SCC 409: (1979) 3 SCR 431. (ii)” and “Shambhu Charan Shukla vs Thakur Ladli Radha Chandra Madan Gopalji Maharaj, AIR 1985 SC 905 (909): (1985) 2 SCC 524: (1985) 3 SCR 372”.  A corporation is treated as a separate legal entity from its member under the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, the company is only liable for the shares of a company, with the exception of illegal acts of the shareholders or directors of the company. In legal proceedings involving natural entities, the Supreme Court of Uttarakhand ordered that the Ganges and Yamuna rivers, as well as all bodies of water, be “living entities, i.e. “legal entities”, and appointed three people as trustees to protect the rights of rivers from man-made pollution, such as “pilgrim bathing rituals”.  Since 19. In the nineteenth century, the legal entity was interpreted in such a way as to make it a citizen, resident or resident of a state (usually for the purposes of personal jurisdiction). In Louisville, C.
& C.R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497, 558, 11 L.Ed. 353 (1844), United States The Supreme Court has held that for the purposes of this case, a corporation “is likely to be treated as a citizen [of the State that created it] in the same manner as a natural person.” Ten years later, they reaffirmed Letson`s conclusion, albeit on the slightly different theory that “those who use the company`s name and exercise the powers it confers” should be conclusively considered citizens of the company`s founding state. Marshall v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 16 How. 314, 329, 14 L.Ed. 953 (1854). These concepts have been codified by law because U.S.
jurisdiction laws refer specifically to the corporate headquarters. The doctrine has been attributed to Pope Innocent IV, who seems to have at least helped spread the idea of persona ficta, as it is called in Latin. In canon law, the teaching of the Persona Ficta allowed monasteries to have a legal existence separate from the monks, which simplified the difficulty of balancing the need for infrastructure for such groups, even if the monks took vows of personal poverty. Another effect of this was that a monastery could not be found guilty as a fictitious person because it had no soul, which helped protect the organization from non-contractual obligations to the surrounding communities. This effectively transferred this responsibility to the people acting within the organization, while protecting the structure itself, as individuals were considered mental and could therefore be negligent and excommunicated.  In legal proceedings concerning corporations, shareholders are not liable for the debts of the corporation, but the corporation itself, as a “legal person,” is obligated to repay those debts or to be sued for non-repayment of debts.  In paragraph (a), the words “and in respect of a corporation under subchapter VI of this chapter, all directors of the corporation are citizens of the United States” are omitted from paragraph 46 App. U.S.C. 1244(c), since Part A of Subchapter VI contains the operational differential subsidy program described in Section 46 App.