![கணவன் மனைவிக்கு சமரசம் ஏற்பட்டாலும் மீண்டும் சண்டை வந்தால் கோர்ட்டில் வழக்கு தொடரலாம் ஐகோர்ட் தீர்ப்பு் கணவனுக்கு வக்கீல் ed n ramesh கணவனின் உறவினர் மீதான வழக்கு ரத்து. Pnpj https://t.co/g4wOcD9Y3r [12/29, 12:07] Sekarreporter1: [12/29, 12:07] Sekarreporter1: Crl.O.P.No.25228 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story Justice Senthilkumar saiad that the injunction continued to operate through the period in which the impugned mark was used and later registered. The Court also noted that the separate civil suit filed by the respondent in Karnataka could not alter the fact that the restraint order was in force and was being ignored. After considering the submissions and the evidence, the Court held that HUL’s application deserved acceptance. In the operative directions, the Court said: “the property in the name of the 1st respondent, namely Roopa Industries, shall be attached to the civil suit in C.S. No.427 of 2015 and the second respondent shall be detained in the civil prison for a period of three months.”
- Previous story Mhaa krishnakumar welcome speech mhaa manipure chief justice m sunder /felicitation
Recent Posts
- The Madras High Court held that the impugned order imposing General Penalty under Section 125 of the TNGST Act, 2017 could not be sustained in law because the default alleged against the petitioner, namely delayed filing of Annual Returns for FY 2020-21, was already specifically dealt with by Section 47 of the GST enactments, which prescribes Late Fee for such
- First Division Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan directed the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer to respond to the contempt plea by July 2, 2026. They, however, dispensed with his personal appearance before the court for now.
- Counsel for Appellants: Mr. R. Palaniandavan Counsel for Respondents: Mr.Perumpulavil Radhakrishnan, Mr.P.T.Perumal Case Title: Sun TV Network Limited v R Sukanya and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 244 Case No: AS No. 971 of 2015
- Defamation case orderTHE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU AS No. 971 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015 Sun TV Network Limited Rep By its Authorized Signatory 73, MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Amended vide Court order dated 27.04.2022 made in CMP No. 7151 of 2022 in A.S. No. 971 of 2015] ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Ms. R. Sukanya 2. Mr. Rajagopal @ R.R.Gopal 3. Mr. Veerappan ..Respondent(s)
- TN Governor clears ED plea to prosecute Senthil Balaji in cash-for-jobs scam case In its complaint against Senthil Balaji, the ED alleged that he had indulged in money laundering after collecting cash from job aspirants in the Transport Department during his tenure as a minister in the AIADMK government between 2011 and 2016.
More
Recent Posts
- The Madras High Court held that the impugned order imposing General Penalty under Section 125 of the TNGST Act, 2017 could not be sustained in law because the default alleged against the petitioner, namely delayed filing of Annual Returns for FY 2020-21, was already specifically dealt with by Section 47 of the GST enactments, which prescribes Late Fee for such
- First Division Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan directed the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer to respond to the contempt plea by July 2, 2026. They, however, dispensed with his personal appearance before the court for now.
- Counsel for Appellants: Mr. R. Palaniandavan Counsel for Respondents: Mr.Perumpulavil Radhakrishnan, Mr.P.T.Perumal Case Title: Sun TV Network Limited v R Sukanya and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 244 Case No: AS No. 971 of 2015
- Defamation case orderTHE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU AS No. 971 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015 Sun TV Network Limited Rep By its Authorized Signatory 73, MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Amended vide Court order dated 27.04.2022 made in CMP No. 7151 of 2022 in A.S. No. 971 of 2015] ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Ms. R. Sukanya 2. Mr. Rajagopal @ R.R.Gopal 3. Mr. Veerappan ..Respondent(s)
- TN Governor clears ED plea to prosecute Senthil Balaji in cash-for-jobs scam case In its complaint against Senthil Balaji, the ED alleged that he had indulged in money laundering after collecting cash from job aspirants in the Transport Department during his tenure as a minister in the AIADMK government between 2011 and 2016.