Follow:
- Next story சென்னை உயர்நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி எஸ்.வைத்தியநாதன், இன்று ஹைதராபாத் போய்விட்டு மீண்டும் சென்னைக்கு இண்டிகோ ஏர்லைனில் திரும்பியபோது, அவரது லக்கேஜ் பையின் பூட்டு உடைக்கப்பட்டுப் பொருள்களைத் திருடும் முயற்சி நடைபெற்றுள்ளது.நீதிபதி அவர்களுடன், சென்னை நந்தனம் அரசு கல்லூரித் தமிழ்த்துறைப் பேராசிரியர் முனைவர் சீ.ரகு அவர்களும், சென்னை அரசு போட்டித் தேர்வுகள் பயிற்சி மைய முதல்வர் முனைவர் இரா.இராமன் அவர்களும் பயணம் செய்துள்ளனர். நீதிபதியின் தந்தை சுப்பிரமணியம் அவர்கள் ஒரு புகழ்பெற்ற தொழிற்சங்கவாதி ஆவார். அவரது வாழ்க்கை வரலாற்றைச் சான்றுகளுடன் எழுதுவதற்காகப் பல்வேறு ஊர்களுக்கு நீதிபதியும் பேராசிரியர்களும் தொடர்ந்து பயணித்து வருகின்றனர். இந்நிலையில், ஓர் அறிவுப் பயணத்தில், இத்தகைய சம்பவம் நிகழ்ந்தது மிகவும் வருத்தமளிப்பதாக உள்ளது என்று பேராசிரியர்கள் கூறினார்கள்
- Previous story Tasmac challenged the constitutional validity of Section 40(a)(iib) of the Income Tax Act of 1961 on the premise that the legal provision “distorts federal polity” and was aimed at “unjustly” enriching the Centre, but a Bench led by Chief Justice of Madras High Court Amreshwar Pratap Sahi dismissed the writ petition. He agreed with Hema Muralikrishnan, senior standing counsel for the I-T Department, that the official concerned was in the process of assessing whether Tasmac was liable to pay tax for ₹14,574.74 crore for the assessment year 2017-18 and hence a challenge to the statutory provision could not be entertained in the present stage.
Recent Posts
- R Y George Williams requested the first bench CISF extent to entire high court as well as entire judiciary in Tamilnau and further argued that baricaurd between the city court and High court May be removed and it maye be covered to entire campus to avoid multiple bresking to enter the high court premises. CJ informed that direction issued to everywhere. and further RY George Williams argued that high court for got the security of the lower judiciary
- Today 5 law tips/ Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC ( cri ) 469 : kamil vs state of Uttar pradesh : sentence or order passed by trial court in absence of charge or any error , omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder cannot be held invalid by court of appeal confirmation or revision, unless the accused is prejudiced and failure of justice has been occasioned thereby (. Sec 464 CRPC )
- SPEECH OF THIRU P.WILSON MP ON EMPOWERMENT OF SC-ST- OBC AT JAWAHAR BHAWAN ON 24.4.2024.
- The Madras University Vice Chancellor Appointment matter filed by B. Jagannath- came up today for Hearing on 23.04.2024 before the Learned First Bench.
- Judge velmurugan order . (31)Accordingly, the Review Application is dismissed with an exemplarycost of Rs.2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Only] payable to the 1st respondent / plaintiff within a period of two weeks from today. The application for appointment
More
Recent Posts
- R Y George Williams requested the first bench CISF extent to entire high court as well as entire judiciary in Tamilnau and further argued that baricaurd between the city court and High court May be removed and it maye be covered to entire campus to avoid multiple bresking to enter the high court premises. CJ informed that direction issued to everywhere. and further RY George Williams argued that high court for got the security of the lower judiciary
- Today 5 law tips/ Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC ( cri ) 469 : kamil vs state of Uttar pradesh : sentence or order passed by trial court in absence of charge or any error , omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder cannot be held invalid by court of appeal confirmation or revision, unless the accused is prejudiced and failure of justice has been occasioned thereby (. Sec 464 CRPC )
- SPEECH OF THIRU P.WILSON MP ON EMPOWERMENT OF SC-ST- OBC AT JAWAHAR BHAWAN ON 24.4.2024.
- The Madras University Vice Chancellor Appointment matter filed by B. Jagannath- came up today for Hearing on 23.04.2024 before the Learned First Bench.
- Judge velmurugan order . (31)Accordingly, the Review Application is dismissed with an exemplarycost of Rs.2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Only] payable to the 1st respondent / plaintiff within a period of two weeks from today. The application for appointment