Sivaganga election case
https://youtu.be/5IW3tIxqgpY
![[22/08, 17:54] Sekarreporter: Kalaimagal sabha case today Aag Ravinthiren filed seven district collector filed reports before the Hon’ble division bench ms ramesh j LNJ and Ag seek time and case Adjourned the case 29/8/25 for further reports for saba advts kamal Nathan and China durai argued [22/08, 17:54] Sekarreporter: .](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story Chakra film stayed mhc
- Previous story judges observed, “God does not recognize any community and only recognizes a human being, who goes there to pray. We are constrained to note that a temple shall not be a place for perpetuating communal separation leading to discrimination. On the other hand, it should facilitate all those persons having common faith to come and worship.”
Recent Posts
- Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira of #MadrasHighCourt has directed Tamil Nadu government to pay a compensation of ₹10 lakh each to three minor boys who were subjected to aggravated penetrative sexual assault by none other than their fathers over a long period of time. Impressing upon the need for trial courts to order compensation in such incestuous abuse cases since
- sekarreporter1: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/markets/markets-news/Tipranks/2345278/beardsell-wins-appeal-battle-to-protect-core-trademark-in-madras-high-court/ [08/06, 11:16] sekarreporter1: Home Canada Business Investing
- 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
More
Recent Posts
- Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira of #MadrasHighCourt has directed Tamil Nadu government to pay a compensation of ₹10 lakh each to three minor boys who were subjected to aggravated penetrative sexual assault by none other than their fathers over a long period of time. Impressing upon the need for trial courts to order compensation in such incestuous abuse cases since
- sekarreporter1: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/markets/markets-news/Tipranks/2345278/beardsell-wins-appeal-battle-to-protect-core-trademark-in-madras-high-court/ [08/06, 11:16] sekarreporter1: Home Canada Business Investing
- 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