Hindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second MHindu Marriage Act – Consent Of First Wife Will Not Make Second M
Follow:
- Next story HC stays sand quarrying in Virudhunagar and Thoothukudi districts: Justices M. Duraiswamy and T. Krishnavalli stayed the sand quarrying operations and directed the State to file a counter in the case. The case was adjourned to next month.
- Previous story Supreme Court commences hearing on pleas challenging abrogation of Article 370 –
Recent Posts
- [25/04, 22:38] DURAIVAIYAPURI Mhc Advt: In the case of Radhika Sri Hari andanother v. Commissioner of Police reported in 2014 (2) CTC 695, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that:-
- The Madras High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 that was enacted on the lines of a model Tenancy Act circulated by the Centre to all States in alignment with its ‘Housing for All’ policy.
- [25/04, 22:05] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 22:02] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1783534512955375768?t=Opq2sGBj6wcjWdqoFNpmpg&s=08[25/04, 22:03] sekarreporter1: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) elections held today (25.04.2024). Mr. Isaac Mohanlal elected as President and Mr. M. Saravanakumar elected as Secretary.[25/04, 22:03] sekarreporter1: 👍👍🌹🌹🌹[25/04, 22:17] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 22:12] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1783536840651468980?t=YtRNZUV3Km0w4IH2cb56jw&s=08[25/04, 22:12] sekarreporter1: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) elections held today (25.04.2024). Mr. M. Saravanakumar elected as Secretary.
- Cont.P.N0.1538 ofCon(.1′.N0.1538 of 2023w.p.Nos.M429, & 31440 or 2023.p.Nos.149(), 1494, 1495, 1496, 1498, 1502, 1503 & 1506 of 2924S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.The Special Officer now appointed by the Government states that she attend’Kalaimaghal Sabha’ Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would oppose by stating that it is a statutory appointment to deal with several crores of public money, where large scale irregularities and illegalities are identified. Therefore, appointment of Special Officer to work one day in a week would be in-sufficient to deal with the affairs of ‘Kalaimaghal Sabha.’ That apart, the Special Officer has to give evidences before the Civil Courts, where suits are pending for recovery of money, property etc., wherein several crores of rupees are involved.
- Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that on verifying the challenged order it is proved that the respondent regarded the timely payment of the applicant of the due amounts for the variance between the GSTR 1 and 3B dated January 9, 2023. Even after the consideration the respondent incorrectly mentioned on Page 23 of the transcript that levied entity loses to settle tax liabilities within 15 days of obtaining the notice on 17th March 2023. The same claim opposes the documented proof.
More
Recent Posts
- [25/04, 22:38] DURAIVAIYAPURI Mhc Advt: In the case of Radhika Sri Hari andanother v. Commissioner of Police reported in 2014 (2) CTC 695, the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that:-
- The Madras High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 that was enacted on the lines of a model Tenancy Act circulated by the Centre to all States in alignment with its ‘Housing for All’ policy.
- [25/04, 22:05] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 22:02] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1783534512955375768?t=Opq2sGBj6wcjWdqoFNpmpg&s=08[25/04, 22:03] sekarreporter1: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) elections held today (25.04.2024). Mr. Isaac Mohanlal elected as President and Mr. M. Saravanakumar elected as Secretary.[25/04, 22:03] sekarreporter1: 👍👍🌹🌹🌹[25/04, 22:17] sekarreporter1: [25/04, 22:12] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1783536840651468980?t=YtRNZUV3Km0w4IH2cb56jw&s=08[25/04, 22:12] sekarreporter1: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) elections held today (25.04.2024). Mr. M. Saravanakumar elected as Secretary.
- Cont.P.N0.1538 ofCon(.1′.N0.1538 of 2023w.p.Nos.M429, & 31440 or 2023.p.Nos.149(), 1494, 1495, 1496, 1498, 1502, 1503 & 1506 of 2924S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.The Special Officer now appointed by the Government states that she attend’Kalaimaghal Sabha’ Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would oppose by stating that it is a statutory appointment to deal with several crores of public money, where large scale irregularities and illegalities are identified. Therefore, appointment of Special Officer to work one day in a week would be in-sufficient to deal with the affairs of ‘Kalaimaghal Sabha.’ That apart, the Special Officer has to give evidences before the Civil Courts, where suits are pending for recovery of money, property etc., wherein several crores of rupees are involved.
- Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that on verifying the challenged order it is proved that the respondent regarded the timely payment of the applicant of the due amounts for the variance between the GSTR 1 and 3B dated January 9, 2023. Even after the consideration the respondent incorrectly mentioned on Page 23 of the transcript that levied entity loses to settle tax liabilities within 15 days of obtaining the notice on 17th March 2023. The same claim opposes the documented proof.