WhatsApp Pay only after RBI nod, Supreme Court told by Sekar Reporter · May 15, 2020 [5/15, 08:05] Sekarreporter 1: WhatsApp Pay only after RBI nod, Supreme Court toldSAMANWAYA RAUTRAYET Bureau | Updated: May 14, 2020, 12.36 PM ISTWhatsApp Pay only after RBI nod, Supreme Court toldGetty ImagesWhatsApp on Wednesday assured the Supreme Court that it would not launch its payment gateway, WhatsApp Pay, before getting the approval of the Reserve Bank of India. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal made the statement on behalf of the messaging platform, before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde. The three-judge bench then clarified that there was no stay on WhatsApp’s application pending with the government.The top court was dealing with a petition filed by NGO Good Governance Chambers, seeking to restrain the government from allowing WhatsApp and Facebook to operate payment gateways. The petition claimed that the reach of WhatsApp and Facebook represented a real threat to the security of financial information that would pass on to them. The court recorded Sibal’s statement, and issued notices to the National Payments Corporation of India, the RBI and the government seeking their formal legal stand on the issue. They will have to respond within three weeks.PEOPLE’S OPINIONREAD COMMENTSPOST COMMENTSHARE THIS ARTICLEREAD MORE ONWHATSAPPSUPREME COURTRESERVE BANK OF INDIAKAPIL SIBALNATIONAL PAYMENTS CORPORATION OF INDIAIN THE SPOTLIGHTET Catalyse Virtual: The role of brand communication during a lockdownET Catalyse Virtual: The role of brand communication during a lockdownRelated NewsBritannia launches WhatsApp based Store LocatorBritannia launches WhatsApp based Store LocatorWhatsApp looks at lending after payments nodWhatsApp looks at lending after payments nodWhatsApp doubles video participants limit to 8WhatsApp doubles video participants limit to 8Leaks, WhatsApp rumours add to quarantine bluesLeaks, WhatsApp rumours add to quarantine bluesMost Read NewsHere’s why FM Nirmala Sitharaman’s stimulus failed to impress stock marketHere’s why FM Nirmala Sitharaman’s stimulus failed to impress stock marketGuidelines for Lockdown 4.0 likely to be announced on May 15Guidelines for Lockdown 4.0 likely to be announced on May 15COVID-19 to have significant deflationary impact due to demand evaporation: CEACOVID-19 to have significant deflationary impact due to demand evaporation: CEAView: The problem with Modi’s Atmanirbhar Bharat AbhiyanView: The problem with Modi’s Atmanirbhar Bharat AbhiyanChina upping ante across Asia to stop exit of firmsChina upping ante across Asia to stop exit of firmsMore From Our PartnersHow to ensure optimum productivity even while working from homeHow to ensure optimum productivity even while working from homeET Catalyse Virtual: The role of brand communication during a lockdownET Catalyse Virtual: The role of brand communication during a lockdownBusiness NewsTechInternetHot on WebCipla Q4 results previewNirmala Sitharaman speech highlightsITR deadline extendedCoronavirus LIVE newsSensex todayGold rate todayCoronavirus impact on crude oil priceCoronavirus impact on economyCoronavirus impactBreaking newsSBI share priceYES Bank share priceSGX NiftySensex LiveIRCTC share priceInfosys share priceRupeeAadhaar CardIn Case you missed itUddhav ThackerayNirmala Sitharaman news LIVENirmala Sitharaman speech highlightsCoronavirus updates LIVECoronavirus vaccineFD calculatorMSME loanITR deadline extendedEPS money withdrawalVijay MallyaIncome tax calculator 20-21List of trains running during lockdownAadhaar cardNew TDS ratesIncome Tax slabsPPFTrending NowCoronavirus updates LIVENirmala Sitharaman conference LIVELockdown e passWorld newsEPF contributionSIPSBI new FD ratesEPF withdrawal processHow to calculate income tax onlineLatest NewsEPF PassbookMutual fundsBreaking newsHow to check your income tax slabNew TDS ratesEPFO portal loginSBI timings during lockdownPAN Aadhaar linking deadline extendedMore from our networkइकनॉमिक टाइम्सઈકોનોમિક ટાઈમ્સPune MirrorBangalore MirrorAhmedabad MirrorItsMyAscentEducation TimesBrand CapitalMumbai MirrorTimes NowIndiatimesमहाराष्ट्र टाइम्सವಿಜಯ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕGo GreenAdAge IndiaEisamayIGN India SamayTimes of IndiaSamayam TamilSamayam TeluguMiss KyraBombay TimesFilmipopGames AppMX PlayerDOWNLOAD ET APPFOLLOW US ONBECOME A MEMBERTerms of Use & Grievance Redressal PolicyPrivacy Policy|Feedback|Opt- out of personalized ads and Delete dataCopyright © 2020 Bennett Coleman & Co. All rights reserved. Powered by Indiatimes.HomeMarketsWealthET PrimeMenu[5/15, 08:05] Sekarreporter 1: 🍁🍁
Case against dmk raja malai murasu tv news December 12, 2020 by Sekar Reporter · Published December 12, 2020
Today 6 law tips / [20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: 2015 (6) SCC 287 : Priyanka srivastava vs state of UP : when a borrower of financial institution covered under the SARFASI act , invokes jurisdiction under sec 156 (3) CRPC and also there is a separate procedure under Recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act , an attitude of more care , caution and circumspection has to be adhered to[20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: Supreme court judgement: SLP ( civil ) No 9496 of 2020 dated 4- 02 – 2022 Ajanta LLP vs casino keisanki kabushiki computer ltd : consent decree cannot be modified / altered unless the mistake is patent or obvious mistake ( order 23 rule 3 CPC 1908 )[20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: 2019 (3) SCC 39 ; Joseph shine vs union.of india : A bench disagreeing with decision.of a larger or coequal bench can only refer the matter to a larger bench , it cannot disagree or dissent[20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: Supreme court: civil.appeal no 363 of 2022 dated 10- 02 – 2022 Bank of baroda vs M / S karwa trading company and another : In a SARFASI proceedings , unless and until borrower ready to deposit / pay entire amount payable together with all costs and expenses with secured creditor , borrower cannot be discharged from entire liability outstanding[20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: 2021 (1) CTC 830 : saradhammal vs sankaralingam : Held transfer of immovable property under attachment with knowledge of attachment vitiates transfer ( sec 52 transfer of property act 1882 )[20/04, 11:16] Vinothpandian: 2011 (7) SCC 69 : Amar singh vs union of india : Held litigants must observe total clarity and candour in their pleadings especially when it contains a prayer for injunction ( order 39 rule 1 & 2 CPC 1908 ) April 20, 2024 by Sekar Reporter · Published April 20, 2024
The HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH No.8507 of 2023and W.M.P.Nos.8697 & 8698 of 2023 M/s.Ajay Agency writ pet dismissed May 18, 2023 by Sekar Reporter · Published May 18, 2023