Skip to content

Search for:

Home
Gallery
Contact Us

Court News from Madras High Court

Home
Gallery
Contact Us

Uncategorized

Dhakshayini Venkatesh Advocate POINT TO PONDER AND ACT

by Sekar Reporter · May 23, 2020

[5/23, 19:02] Sekarreporter 1: [5/23, 19:01] Sekarreporter 1: https://twitter.com/DhakshayiniVen1/status/1264147016814387200?s=08
[5/23, 19:02] Sekarreporter 1: Join now
Dhakshayini Venkatesh
Dhakshayini Venkatesh
Senior Advocate
3h · Edited
POINT TO PONDER AND ACT
mutualfunds being wound up can be listed #SEBI says..some semblance of sanity in this #economymomentum …
Last month Franklin Templeton wound up 6 Debt schemes with cumulative Assets worth 26000 crores. It is said that Kotak Mahindra Bank was said to have been appointed to assist in the monetization of the said schemes..
[5/23, 19:02] Sekarreporter 1: POINT TO PONDER AND ACT
mutualfunds being wound up can be listed #SEBI says..some semblance of sanity in this #economymomentum …
Last month Franklin Templeton wound up 6 Debt schemes with cumulative Assets worth 26000 crores.
[5/23, 19:03] Sekarreporter 1: 🍁🍁

You may also like...

Advocate B. Ramkumar Adityan has filed a writ petition in Madras HC to quash a GO issued by TN Govt on Aug 26 cancelling arrear examinations for college students this year.

September 4, 2020

by Sekar Reporter · Published September 4, 2020
The Madras High Court is planning to take justice to the doorsteps of litigants, literally. Chief Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi is mulling over the possibility of operating vans with computers and Internet connectivity to remote villages in Tamil Nadu for people to take part in judicial proceedings virtually without having to travel to different courts. In a circular to all principal district judges in Tamil Nadu and the Chief Judge of Puducherry, the High Court’s Registrar-General, C. Kumarappan, has called for their views on implementing the mobile virtual court plan. He wanted to know whether the judicial officers had the financial resources to implement it at the earliest in their districts. Experimental basis

July 17, 2020

by Sekar Reporter · Published July 17, 2020
lashminarayanan Advt Mhc: Sekar Please permit me to recollect the the words of justice K. Chandru in a matter where a retired judge of the SC accepted the office of inquiry officer. He opined : – 16.It will be interesting to quote from an article written by Mr.Sudarshan Agarwal, former Governor of Uttarakhand and Sikkim under the caption “Do retired SC Judges violate the spirit of Article 124?” and it is stated as follows :

February 12, 2020

by Sekar Reporter · Published February 12, 2020

Follow:

Next story Vasanthakumar Advt: Wonderful & thread bare analysis of pros and cons of Virtual Courts & challenges by his Lordship Justice M S Ramesh.full video www.Sekarreporter.com
Previous story [5/23, 18:55] Vasanthakumar Advt: Justice M Sundar made us to be pride in Panel discussion on Tribunals & backlog by saying that Madras Bar Association is the forerunner in contribution for March of Law with regard to imposing checks & balance on the functioning of Tribunals & summarised the ratio of Rojar Mathew in bullet points. Excellent session 🙏🏼 [5/23, 18:55] Sekarreporter 1: 🍁

Search for:

Recent Posts

Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala released a directory of designated senior advocates brought out by Tamil Nadu Senior Advocates Forum and Justice R. Mahadevan, the seniormost judge of the High Court, received the first copy in Chennai on April 24, 2024
today 4 law tips Vinothpandian: 2020 (1) crimes 134 SC : Ahmad Ali quraishi vs state of Uttar pradesh : Rejection.of application under section.156(3) CRPC does not preclude a complainant to file a complaint under section 200 CRPC
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR andTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADIW.A. No.1181 of 2024 andC.M.P.Nos.8549 and 8550 of 2024Ashok Leyland Limited rep. By itsAuthorized Signatory Satish S.M.,No.1, Sardar Patel Road,Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. .. AppellantVs.1.The Controller of Patents & Designs,The Patent Office, ChennaiPatent Office Intellectual Property Building, G.S.T. Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.2.Tata Motors Ltd.,Bombay House,24, Homi Mody Street,Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai – 400 001. .. RespondentsWrit Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patentagainst the impugned order dated 15.03.2024 passed in W.P. (IPD) No.1 of 2024 in respect of post-grant opposition proceedings against the Appellant’s patent number IN387429 (Patent application number 201641025668 dated 27.07.2016) and consequently direct respondent No.1 to consider the documents filed by the petitioner and the respondent No.2 and to consider the matter afresh by re-constituting a fresh Opposition Board for providing a fresh joint recommendation pending disposal of thepresent writ appeal.For Appellant : Mr.M.S.BharathFor Respondents : Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan, Deputy Solicitor General for R1Mr.P.V.Balasubramanian, Senior Counsel for Ms.Archana Shankar for R2ORDER(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J.)Captioned ‘Writ Appeal’ (hereinafter ‘captioned WA’ forthe sake of convenience and clarity) is an intra-court appeal and it is directed against an order dated 15.03.2024 made by Intellectual Property Division of this Court i.e., by a Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(IPD) No.1 of 2024 and W.M.P. Nos.1 and 2thereat.
In this context, in order to effectively implement the guidelines, the first respondent shall direct all the District Educational Authorities to constitute Monitoring Committees in each schools headed by the Head of the Institution, parents, teachers, senior students etc., as decided by the Government and such Monitoring Committees shall ensure that the guidelines are implemented scrupulously and any untoward incidents or any different behaviour of the staff members and the children, are brought to the notice of the Authorities, for initiation of remedial measures, the first respondent is directed to issue the guidelines in consonance with the Clauses 7.8 and 7.9 of the Guidelines for Elimination of Corporal Punishment in Schools (GECP).(7) The consolidated Circular/Instructions are directed to be issued, within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Case agains Pension Scheme / HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM andTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKARW. P.Nos.1661 of 2015 and 19076 and 35462 of 2023andW.M.P.Nos.18326, 18327, 35437 and 35439 of 2023W.P.No.1661 of 2015 dismissed#,#

More

Recent Posts

Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala released a directory of designated senior advocates brought out by Tamil Nadu Senior Advocates Forum and Justice R. Mahadevan, the seniormost judge of the High Court, received the first copy in Chennai on April 24, 2024
today 4 law tips Vinothpandian: 2020 (1) crimes 134 SC : Ahmad Ali quraishi vs state of Uttar pradesh : Rejection.of application under section.156(3) CRPC does not preclude a complainant to file a complaint under section 200 CRPC
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR andTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADIW.A. No.1181 of 2024 andC.M.P.Nos.8549 and 8550 of 2024Ashok Leyland Limited rep. By itsAuthorized Signatory Satish S.M.,No.1, Sardar Patel Road,Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. .. AppellantVs.1.The Controller of Patents & Designs,The Patent Office, ChennaiPatent Office Intellectual Property Building, G.S.T. Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.2.Tata Motors Ltd.,Bombay House,24, Homi Mody Street,Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai – 400 001. .. RespondentsWrit Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patentagainst the impugned order dated 15.03.2024 passed in W.P. (IPD) No.1 of 2024 in respect of post-grant opposition proceedings against the Appellant’s patent number IN387429 (Patent application number 201641025668 dated 27.07.2016) and consequently direct respondent No.1 to consider the documents filed by the petitioner and the respondent No.2 and to consider the matter afresh by re-constituting a fresh Opposition Board for providing a fresh joint recommendation pending disposal of thepresent writ appeal.For Appellant : Mr.M.S.BharathFor Respondents : Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan, Deputy Solicitor General for R1Mr.P.V.Balasubramanian, Senior Counsel for Ms.Archana Shankar for R2ORDER(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J.)Captioned ‘Writ Appeal’ (hereinafter ‘captioned WA’ forthe sake of convenience and clarity) is an intra-court appeal and it is directed against an order dated 15.03.2024 made by Intellectual Property Division of this Court i.e., by a Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(IPD) No.1 of 2024 and W.M.P. Nos.1 and 2thereat.
In this context, in order to effectively implement the guidelines, the first respondent shall direct all the District Educational Authorities to constitute Monitoring Committees in each schools headed by the Head of the Institution, parents, teachers, senior students etc., as decided by the Government and such Monitoring Committees shall ensure that the guidelines are implemented scrupulously and any untoward incidents or any different behaviour of the staff members and the children, are brought to the notice of the Authorities, for initiation of remedial measures, the first respondent is directed to issue the guidelines in consonance with the Clauses 7.8 and 7.9 of the Guidelines for Elimination of Corporal Punishment in Schools (GECP).(7) The consolidated Circular/Instructions are directed to be issued, within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Case agains Pension Scheme / HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM andTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKARW. P.Nos.1661 of 2015 and 19076 and 35462 of 2023andW.M.P.Nos.18326, 18327, 35437 and 35439 of 2023W.P.No.1661 of 2015 dismissed#,#

SEKAR REPORTER © 2024. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by - Designed with the Hueman theme