SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Daily Archive: May 31, 2021

[5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1399351445183352834?s=1006 [5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: Mr. J. Aristotle and Mr. D. Kumanan appointed as Advocate on Record for Government of Tamil Nadu in Supreme Court [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: 💐

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

[5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1399351445183352834?s=1006 [5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: Mr. J. Aristotle and Mr. D. Kumanan appointed as Advocate on Record for Government of Tamil Nadu in Supreme Court [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: 💐

[5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1399351445183352834?s=1006 [5/31, 18:41] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: Mr. J. Aristotle and Mr. D. Kumanan appointed as Advocate on Record for Government of Tamil Nadu in Supreme Court [5/31, 18:35] Sekarreporter1: 💐

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[5/31, 14:15] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: https://www.theleaflet.in/time-for-courts-to-define-limits-of-sedition-law-says-sc-stays-coercive-action-by-ap-police-against-2-tv-channels/ [5/31, 17:10] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: “You keep on saying the situation is dynamic but policymakers must have their ears on ground. You keep on saying digital India, digital India but the situation is actually different in rural areas”, Justice #Chandrachud said. #Covid19 #Vaccination https://www.theleaflet.in/sc-asks-centre-to-address-issue-of-digital-divide-in-registration-for-covid-vaccinations-says-policymakers-must-show-deference-to-court/ [5/31, 17:15] Sekarreporter1: Send video interview regarding this for my youtube channal

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

[5/31, 14:15] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: https://www.theleaflet.in/time-for-courts-to-define-limits-of-sedition-law-says-sc-stays-coercive-action-by-ap-police-against-2-tv-channels/ [5/31, 17:10] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: “You keep on saying the situation is dynamic but policymakers must have their ears on ground. You keep on saying digital India, digital India but the situation is actually different in rural areas”, Justice #Chandrachud said. #Covid19 #Vaccination https://www.theleaflet.in/sc-asks-centre-to-address-issue-of-digital-divide-in-registration-for-covid-vaccinations-says-policymakers-must-show-deference-to-court/ [5/31, 17:15] Sekarreporter1: Send video interview regarding this for my youtube channal

4[5/31, 14:15] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: https://www.theleaflet.in/time-for-courts-to-define-limits-of-sedition-law-says-sc-stays-coercive-action-by-ap-police-against-2-tv-channels/ [5/31, 17:10] Leaf Let Web Paras Nath Singh: “You keep on saying the situation is dynamic but policymakers must have their ears on ground. You...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Lordship Justice S.Vaidyanathan The interim order is that in case the 3rd respondent / father-in-law of the petitioner is able to establish that he only paid the entire premium to LIC by way of NEFT / RTGS / Transfer, other than remittance by cash in the name of his deceased son, then, there is no justification on the part of the petitioner/daughter-in-law of R3 to seek for her share in the amount and the petitioner has no case at all. Judge directed R1 and R2 to circulate the interim order to all its Branches and collect details of similar case for production before this Court by way of counter on 28.06.2021.

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

Lordship Justice S.Vaidyanathan The interim order is that in case the 3rd respondent / father-in-law of the petitioner is able to establish that he only paid the entire premium to LIC by way of NEFT / RTGS / Transfer, other than remittance by cash in the name of his deceased son, then, there is no justification on the part of the petitioner/daughter-in-law of R3 to seek for her share in the amount and the petitioner has no case at all. Judge directed R1 and R2 to circulate the interim order to all its Branches and collect details of similar case for production before this Court by way of counter on 28.06.2021.

W.P.No.10316 of 2021 Lordship Justice S.Vaidyanathan The interim order is that in case the 3rd respondent / father-in-law of the petitioner is able to establish that he only paid the entire premium to LIC...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Sekarreporter1: 2 came up for hearing, the Hon’ble Madras High Court, Madurai Bench was pleased to pass interim orders on 26.05.2021 . As against the said Interim orders dt 26.05.2021, the appellant i.e. The Secretary to Government, Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection Department has moved the present appeal. 2. 2. It the meantime, the 1st Respondent herein (writ petitioner), taking into consideration the urgency expressed by the government in going ahead with the impugned tender as one of the steps in dealing with the pandemic, and in public interest, the petitioner has decided to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to its right to represent before the government for reviewing the tender terms in future. Hence, the 1st Respondent herein (writ petitioner) has filed a Withdrawal Memo before the Registry of the Hon’ble Madurai Bench by mail on 29.O5.2O21 for withdrawal of the above mentioned Writ Petition(s), with a copy marked to Registry of Hon’ble Madras High Court and the other side counsel. Dated at Chennai on this 30ft day of May,2O2l f6* AYt #dvdlilAfilrS, t&,4lyt Petitioner C +x r.rffi*i Counsel for the Petitioner 3. In these circumstances, we pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record the above submissions, and dispose of the said Writ Appeal accordingly. Page 2 of 2

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

Sekarreporter1: 2 came up for hearing, the Hon’ble Madras High Court, Madurai Bench was pleased to pass interim orders on 26.05.2021 . As against the said Interim orders dt 26.05.2021, the appellant i.e. The Secretary to Government, Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection Department has moved the present appeal. 2. 2. It the meantime, the 1st Respondent herein (writ petitioner), taking into consideration the urgency expressed by the government in going ahead with the impugned tender as one of the steps in dealing with the pandemic, and in public interest, the petitioner has decided to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to its right to represent before the government for reviewing the tender terms in future. Hence, the 1st Respondent herein (writ petitioner) has filed a Withdrawal Memo before the Registry of the Hon’ble Madurai Bench by mail on 29.O5.2O21 for withdrawal of the above mentioned Writ Petition(s), with a copy marked to Registry of Hon’ble Madras High Court and the other side counsel. Dated at Chennai on this 30ft day of May,2O2l f6* AYt #dvdlilAfilrS, t&,4lyt Petitioner C +x r.rffi*i Counsel for the Petitioner 3. In these circumstances, we pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record the above submissions, and dispose of the said Writ Appeal accordingly. Page 2 of 2

[5/31, 13:55] Sekarreporter1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Appellate Jurisdictionl C.M.P. No. 8895, 8898, 8901, 8902 of 2O2l IN W.A. Filing No. 49760, 49761, 49762, 49763 of 2O2l The Secretary to...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[5/31, 12:04] Sekarreporter1: Send one video interview regarding the order for my youtube channal [5/31, 12:08] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 12:06] Sekarreporter1: Crl.R.C.No.234 of 2021 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram Senior Counsel

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

[5/31, 12:04] Sekarreporter1: Send one video interview regarding the order for my youtube channal [5/31, 12:08] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 12:06] Sekarreporter1: Crl.R.C.No.234 of 2021 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram Senior Counsel

[5/31, 12:04] Sekarreporter1: Send one video interview regarding the order for my youtube channal [5/31, 12:08] Sekarreporter1: [5/31, 12:06] Sekarreporter1: Crl.R.C.No.234 of 2021 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram Senior Counsel...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Humble reply to the qurey posted by Hon’ble Justice: As per the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as enumerated above. The satisfaction of the ingredients of Section 304B is sufficient for conviction under the same and does not require further finding by the Court and unnatural death within the circumstances as provided by Section 304B is sufficient.

Uncategorized

 by · Published May 31, 2021

Humble reply to the qurey posted by Hon’ble Justice: As per the findings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as enumerated above. The satisfaction of the ingredients of Section 304B is sufficient for conviction under the same and does not require further finding by the Court and unnatural death within the circumstances as provided by Section 304B is sufficient.

[5/31, 07:09] Sekarreporter1: *GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *Crl.A. 1735-1736/2010* Satbir Singh Vs. St. of Haryana Dated: 28.05.2021 *Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana* , partly allowed the Criminal Appeal with respect to...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Exit mobile version