SEKAR REPORTER Blog

Meta AI: The Madras High Court (Justices R.Suresh Kumar & A.D.Jagadish Chandira) is handling a case (W.P.No.36085 of 2025) involving S.Devi’s petition for a shop at Marina Beach. ✅ The court directed the Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC) to draft a plan for shops at Marina Beach, limiting goods to eatables, toys, and fancy goods/souvenirs. ✅ GCC filed a re-drafted map with 1006 shops (down from 1417). ✅ The court discussed making a large area (100 acres) in Marina Beach a Blue Flag Area to beautify it.

[09/01, 07:59] Meta AI: The Madras High Court (Justices R.Suresh Kumar & A.D.Jagadish Chandira) is handling a case (W.P.No.36085 of 2025) involving S.Devi’s petition for a shop at Marina Beach. ✅ The court directed...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

Meta AI: The Madras High Court recently ruled that a person’s right to express their views can’t be restricted with a blanket order, especially when it comes to social media posts. Justice N Senthilkumar emphasized that if someone like Rangaraj wants to restrain posts against him, he needs to prove that there’s commercial exploitation of his personality rights. ¹ ² ³

[09/01, 07:53] Meta AI: The Madras High Court recently ruled that a person’s right to express their views can’t be restricted with a blanket order, especially when it comes to social media posts. Justice...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

Justice N Sentilkumar noted that there could not be a blanket order restricting a person from exercising their right to express their views. The court noted that if Rangaraj wanted to restrain posts against him, he had to establish that there was commercial exploitation of his personality rights.

The Madras High Court has refused to grant an interim injunction in favour of celebrity chef Madhampatty Rangaraj restraining celebrity stylist Joy Crizildaa from making social media posts against the former. Justice N Sentilkumar...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

Meta AI: The Madras High Court has allowed the Original Side Appeal (O.S.A.No.227 of 2025) filed by Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd., setting aside the order dated 05.09.2022 in O.P.No.260 of 2022. The court has made the interim protection granted under order dated 18.07.2025 absolute.

[09/01, 07:43] Meta AI: The Madras High Court has allowed the Original Side Appeal (O.S.A.No.227 of 2025) filed by Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd., setting aside the order dated 05.09.2022 in O.P.No.260 of 2022. The...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
THE  HIGH  COURT OF  JUDICATURE  AT  BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM  APPLICATION   (L) NO. 38715 OF  2025 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 38674 OF 2025 Phonographic Performance Limited	  …Applicant Versus

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 38715 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 38674 OF 2025 Phonographic Performance Limited …Applicant Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 38715 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 38674 OF 2025 Phonographic Performance...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria heard the matter. The hearing will continue tomorrow, for which Justice Mehta has asked all parties to come prepared after reading a report published by a news portal on December 29 titled “On the roof of the world, feral dogs hunt down Ladakh’s rare species”.

In the Stray Dogs case, the Supreme Court today commented on the municipal authorities’ failure to tackle threat of stray dogs. It further voiced concern that dogs can smell fear and attack someone who...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[08/01, 19:05] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: Why we should worry about denial of pre trial. Bail   In both the Bhima Koregaon and Delhi riots cases, a wrongful invoking of UAPA and obdurate refusal to follow precedent on delay in trial, raise legitimate questions on the independence of the judiciary.  https://theleaflet.in/sedition-uapa/shadows-of-judicial-indiscipline-on-the-supreme-courts-bail-denial-to-umar-khalid-and-sharjeel-imam [08/01, 20:13] Sekarreporter: 👍

[08/01, 19:05] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: Why we should worry about denial of pre trial. Bail In both the Bhima Koregaon and Delhi riots cases, a wrongful invoking of UAPA and obdurate refusal to follow precedent on delay in trial, raise legitimate questions on the independence of the judiciary. https://theleaflet.in/sedition-uapa/shadows-of-judicial-indiscipline-on-the-supreme-courts-bail-denial-to-umar-khalid-and-sharjeel-imam [08/01, 20:13] Sekarreporter: 👍

[08/01, 19:05] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: Why we should worry about denial of pre trial. Bail In both the Bhima Koregaon and Delhi riots cases, a wrongful invoking of UAPA and obdurate refusal...

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