Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018

<keyword id="7160701" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="the-year-2018">The year 2018</keyword> saw the <keyword id="75952" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court-of-India">Supreme Court of India</keyword> pass some pivotal judgements that have borne in favour of equality. Under the umbrella of Justice Dipak Misra, the judgements have sparked debate, joy and also anger. The Supreme Court verdict on decriminalising homosexuality allowing the entry of women in the Sabarimala temple in the year 2018, while appreciated, were also judgements that were widely debated. The controversy surrounding the Aadhaar Act was also put to rest with Sections 33(2), 47 and 57 being struck down. The primary concern of citizens was abated with private entities no longer being allowed to demand Aadhaar data and the national security exception being revoked. Here are the some of the major verdicts passed down by the <keyword id="7160700" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court-in-the-year-2018">Supreme Court in the year 2018</keyword>:

On 13 September, <keyword id="245445" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ranjan-Gogoi">Ranjan Gogoi</keyword>, was appointed the Chief of Justice of India (<keyword id="6363345" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="cji">CJI</keyword>), succeeding <keyword id="6355251" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="dipak-misra">Dipak Misra</keyword>. The moment was historic. Gogoi is the first CJI from the Northeast of India. He is also stepping into Misra’s shoes ahead of the latter’s retirement on 2 October. Given his status as the senior-most judge on the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> after Misra, his appointment was all but guaranteed. He was recommended for the post on 4 September by his predecessor. Gogoi has had a long and varied career since passing the bar in 1978. He spent the initial chunk of his career at the Guwahati High Court, before his transfer to the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2010 and eventual elevation to the Supreme Court in 2012. Here are five things you should know about the 46th CJI:- He will only have a tenure of 13 months As per the Indian Constitution, Chief Justices cannot be above the age of 65. Just like his predecessor Misra, Gogoi, who is currently 63 years of age, will only hold the post of CJI for 13 months. He will turn 65 on November 17th next year. Following his retirement, he will likely be replaced by the Madan Bhimarao Lokur, who is the senior-most judge after him. The short stints of Chief Justices has long been an issue of debate among Indian parliamentarians. Since independence, the 65-year limit has resulted in the average tenure of a CJI being around 18 months. Earlier this year, the government was said to be mulling a proposal to raise the retirement age of the CJI. However, this was mired in accusations that this was a ploy to prolong the tenure of Misra, who is said to favour the current administration. His father is a former chief minister of Assam Gogoi’s father, Keshab Chandra Gogoi, was a lawyer-turned politician and influential Congress leader in Assam. He became the chief minister of Assam for two months in 1982 as protests over the issue of illegal immigration swelled. Interestingly, according to the book Gauhati High Court: History and Heritage by Arup Kumar Dutta, when a colleague asked him if he wanted his son to become Chief Minister, KC Gogoi said that his son would one day become the CJI. He’s presided over a number of important SC judgements Gogoi has overseen a lot of important cases and judgements during his tenure as a Supreme Court judge. In May 2018, he revoked a proposal from the Uttar Pradesh government that allowed all ex-chief ministers to retain their official residences. He also presided over the cases of Arushi Talwar’s murder, the setting up of special courts to try Members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies and a judgement prohibiting the government from using photographs of anyone else but the PM, President and the CJI for advertising purposes. He is currently leading a bench that has been tasked with monitoring updates to the National Register of Citizens in order to prevent unnecessary deportations of Assamese residents. He has released details of his assets to the public Gogoi is among the 11 out of 23 sitting judges in the Supreme Court who have published details of their assets and financial holdings on the SC website. According to <a href="https://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/pdf/ASSETS/ranjangogoi.pdf">the filing</a>, he does not own a car and does not have any outstanding debts or investments in mutual funds or shares. Until this year, his most prominent assets were a piece of a land in Assam that he sold for ₹6.5 million in June 2018 and an old house he inherited from his mother in mid-2015. He was one of the judges who criticised former CJI Dipak Misra Gogoi’s possible appointment as CJI came under speculation after he and three other senior Supreme Court judges called a press conference at the beginning of 2018 to criticise CJI Misra and state the India’s democracy was under threat. In what was the first such event in the history of the Indian judicial system, the group of judges - which included Gogoi, Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and the now retired J Chelameswar - said that Misra’s system of allocating certain cases was faulty and politically motivated. As he takes on the post of CJI, one of Gogoi’s first tasks will to be clean the SC’s image and improving the roster system of case allocation.

Here are 5 things you should know about Ranjan Gogoi, the new Chief Justice of India

<ul><li>The Supreme Court of <keyword id="3658" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="India">India</keyword> lifted the ban imposed on setting up a dance bar in <keyword id="13126" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Maharashtra">Maharashtra</keyword> today. </li><li>It also ruled against other proposed restrictions like the installation of cameras inside the bar. </li><li>The decision came in when a petition challenged the strict norms levied by state government that made it almost impossible to set up and run a dance bar in Maharashtra. </li></ul>The ban on <keyword id="94250" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Dance-bars">dance bars</keyword> in India’s financial capital has been lifted by the country’s Supreme Court. The government of Maharashtra can regulate these bars but cannot fully prohibit them, the court said in its verdict. The court ruling also overturned installation of cameras inside the bars as it invades privacy. The Supreme Court has also removed the mandatory condition of dance bars to be one kilometer away from religious places or school citing it ‘unreasonable’ for <keyword id="6358070" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="mumbai">Mumbai</keyword>. In 2018, some of the dance bars in Maharashtra that were already carrying out business were exempted from certain clauses of the new law imposed by the state government.The top court said the laws were ‘weird and ridiculous’. Mumbai has a long history of ‘dance bars’ — bars that had women entertaining guests with private or group dancing in exchange for tips. However, these were banned in 2005 by the state government, mostly on moral grounds, but was later struck down by the Bombay High Court in 2013. However, the then Congress government brought an ordinance to implement the ban. Today’s verdict from the SC allows aspiring dance bar operators to procure a licence from the state government and operate under stricter regulations. While the government took a <a href="https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/maharashtra-dance-bar-sc-142189">moral high ground</a> on the debate over dance bars, a union of the dancers, called the 'Bharatiya Bargirls Union’ complained that the ban was not amoral or hurting their dignity, it only took away a source of livelihood. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/miscellaneous/10-landmark-judgements-indias-supreme-court-passed-in-2018/slidelist/67254190.cms">10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-landmark-supreme-court-verdict-on-reservation-quotas-for-job-promotions/articleshow/65981169.cms">All you need to know about the landmark Supreme Court verdict on reservation quotas for job promotions</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/supreme-court-of-india-lifts-ban-women-of-all-ages-can-now-enter-sabarimala-temple/articleshow/65993339.cms">Supreme Court of India lifts ban, women of all ages can now enter Sabarimala temple</a>

Mumbai can have dance bars again but conditions apply

<ul><li><keyword id="2665691" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Niti-Aayog">Niti Aayog</keyword> is reportedly working on a proposal for a performance index of <keyword id="6391479" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="judges">judges</keyword>. </li><li>The think tank is developing a system to review the annual performance of judges across the country - from the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> to the district courts. </li><li>The index will cover more than 17,000 judges and will be made public. </li><li>While the performance review proposal will likely be opposed by judges, Niti Aayog likely sees it as a way to make India’s courts operate with more efficiency.</li></ul>The Indian government’s policy think tank, Niti Aayog, is <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/niti-aayog-working-on-proposal-to-appraise-judges-performance-make-rankings-public/articleshow/69210175.cms?from=mdr">reportedly working </a>on a proposal for a performance index of judges. The think tank is developing a system to review the annual performance of judges across the country - from the Supreme Court to the district courts. The index will cover more than 17,000 judges. The rankings will also be made public, not only in the interest of transparency, but to motivate judges to perform better. The index will rank judges based on a number of indicators such as cost per case, pending caseload, duration of trials and clearance rate. The idea of a <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/niti-aayog-for-a-judicial-performance-index-to-check-pendency/articleshow/60277247.cms">“judicial performance index”</a> was first mooted by the think tank in August 2017, but for lower courts. At the time, it also suggested an online recruitment system for Indian courts. 
 <div type="image" title="PANELBI19" msid="69215282" hostid="261"></div>



 While the performance review proposal will likely be opposed by judges, Niti Aayog likely sees it as a way to make India’s courts operate with more efficiency. In December 2018, the think tank also proposed <a href="https://www.dailypioneer.com/2018/india/niti-aayog-for-all-india-test-to-select-judges-for-lower-courts.html">an all-India exam </a>to appoint judges for district courts. Indian courts have a huge backlog. There are currently <a href="https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard">30.4 million</a> pending court cases in India, according to the National Judicial Data Grid, 73% of which are more than 1 year old. A study by India’s finance ministry reportedly estimated that it would <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/niti-aayog-working-on-proposal-to-appraise-judges-performance-make-rankings-public/articleshow/69210175.cms?from=mdr">take 324 years </a>to clear up the caseload at the current rate of completion. If the judges performance review is to become effective in making courts more efficient, it will have to be supplemented with better resources and infrastructure for the courts, Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, the former solicitor general, told <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/niti-aayog-working-on-proposal-to-appraise-judges-performance-make-rankings-public/articleshow/69210175.cms?from=mdr">ET</a>. There should also be a system of case disposal targets at the high courts and Supreme Courts, as is the case for lower courts, he added. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/miscellaneous/10-landmark-judgements-indias-supreme-court-passed-in-2018/slidelist/67254190.cms">10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/the-indian-government-just-reduced-the-autonomy-of-the-regulator-that-makes-drugs-affordable/articleshow/67635790.cms">The Indian government just reduced the autonomy of the regulator that makes drugs affordable</a>

India’s public policy think tank is reportedly planning an index to rank the annual performance of judges

New Delhi, The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Thursday struck down the electoral bond scheme, saying it violates the right to information and the freedom of speech and expression under the Constitution. In a landmark judgement that will have wide ramifications, it ordered the <keyword id="19934368" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="state-bank-of-india" source="keywords">State Bank of India</keyword> to disclose to the <keyword id="19895782" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="election-commission" source="keywords">Election Commission</keyword> the names of the contributors to the six-year-old scheme. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice <keyword id="19936357" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="d-y-chandrachud" source="keywords">D Y Chandrachud</keyword> delivered two separate and unanimous verdicts on the pleas challenging the scheme, delivering a major blow to the central government. Pronouncing the verdict, the CJI said the scheme is violative of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution. The bench said the fundamental right to privacy also includes citizens' right to political privacy and affiliation. It also held as invalid the amendments made in various laws, including the <keyword id="20592932" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="representation-of-peoples-act" source="keywords">Representation of Peoples Act</keyword> and the Income Tax laws. It directed that the issuing bank shall stop issuance of electoral bonds and the State Bank of India shall submit details of electoral bonds purchased since April 12, 2019 till date to the Election Commission. The top court had on November 2 last year reserved its verdict in the matter. The scheme, which was notified by the government on January 2, 2018, was pitched as an alternative to cash donations made to political parties as part of efforts to bring transparency in political funding. According to the provisions of the scheme, electoral bonds may be purchased by any citizen of India or entity incorporated or established in the country. An individual can buy electoral bonds, either singly or jointly with other individuals without disclosing the identity. Critics have said this eliminates transparency in electoral funding and gives an edge to the ruling parties.

SC strikes down electoral bond scheme, terms it unconstitutional

<ul><li>The government’s newly-introduced <keyword id="3122385" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="10-QUOTA">10% quota</keyword> for ‘economically weaker sections’ for <keyword id="839945" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Central-Government-Jobs">central government jobs</keyword> will be in effect from 1 February onwards. </li><li>It applies to people who have a gross annual family income less of less than ₹800,000. </li><li>Denying the move as an election gimmick, Union Minister Piyush Goyal said that the scheme has been in the pipeline for long.</li></ul>The Modi government’s new rule to set aside 10% quota for ‘economically weaker sections’ for government jobs is set to go into effect on February 1. The quota is widely believed to benefit India’s middle class and the poor among India’s upper castes. According to an <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/economically-weak-in-general-category-to-get-quota-in-jobs-notified-after-february-1/articleshow/67630972.cms">official notification</a>, the provision will be incorporated for all direct recruitment vacancies from next month. However, people seeking this quota will have to get their salaries, assets and family income verified from ranks above tehsildar of Union territories/states. The rule includes reservation for anyone with a gross annual family income of up to ₹800,000 The new law also includes a 10% reservation for people seeking to study in private colleges across various courses in over 900 universities. That will go into effect in the next academic session, IANS reported citing Union Minister for Human Resource Development Prakash Javadekar. Facing criticism that the move is an election gimmick, Union Minister Piyush Goyal <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/centre-notifies-10-ews-quota-for-government-jobs-5547605/">reportedly said that</a> the scheme has been in the pipeline for long. However, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), a political party in the state of Tamil Nadu, has challenged the ‘constitutional validity’ of the provision. Another petition was filed with the Supreme Court by ‘Youth For Equality,’ a non-profit challenging its constitutionality, citing the breach of an earlier Supreme Court judgment that put a cap on reservations at 50% As this quota applies to anyone who fulfills the income criteria, it will easily exceed that percentage. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/modis-bill-leaves-out-the-oppressed-castes-from-reservation-in-private-colleges/articleshow/67450476.cms">Modi’s bill leaves out the oppressed castes from reservation in private colleges</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/indian-government-woos-the-countrys-elite-considers-reservation-for-backward-upper-castes/articleshow/67420469.cms">Poll-bound Narendra Modi returns to core voter base, seeks 10% quota for upper castes — but will it fly?</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/indias-supreme-court-judgements-2018/articleshow/67253782.cms">10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018</a>

India’s 10% quota for jobs for ‘economically weaker sections’ to go into effect next month

<ul><li>In March, 2017, the Uttarakhand High Court declared that rivers, Ganga and Yamuna, would be legally treated as “living people,” and enjoy “all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person”.</li><li>However, in September 2018, Justice Chandrachud of India’s Supreme Court said that while a deity or an idol can own property and have other legal rights, but it cannot granted fundamental rights.</li><li>So in the case between those who want a temple for Lord Rama in Ayodhya and those who want to restore a demolished mosque, one of the parties to the case is Lord Rama himself⁠.</li></ul>One of the important questions in front of the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice <keyword id="245445" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ranjan-Gogoi">Ranjan Gogoi</keyword> is the following: Is the Ram Janmabhoomi (the birthplace of Lord Rama) a juristic entity, independent of the presence of idols? And if so, is it immune from possession claims as a juristic entity? A juristic person, as opposed to a “natural person” (that is, a human being), is an entity whom the law vests with a personality. The practice began under the British administration of India. The British administrators held that the legal owner of a temple’s land and wealth was the deity, with a shebait or manager acting as trustee. Much like a corporation and its directors. However, one cannot place a deity and bestow it with wealth and property. For a deity to be considered a legal entity only “when it is consecrated and installed at a public place for the public at large,” according to the judgement in the Yogendra Nath Naskar vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax (1969) case. This entails a Hindu ritual called the ‘prana pratishta’ after which the deity is believed to have come alive. However, a mosque, a church or a gurdwara cannot be considered as juristic entities because these are places where people gather to worship and are not objects of worship themselves, according to a Supreme Court verdict in 2000. 
	
	
	
	
	
	<div type="Slideshow" msid="71948744" hostid="261" title="In India, Gods, rivers, and animals can pay taxes, hold property, sue, and get sued⁠— and that’s an important factor in the Ayodhya case" firstImageMsid="71948747" slideCount="3"></div>

In India, Gods, rivers, and animals can pay taxes, hold property, sue, and get sued⁠— and that’s an important factor in the Ayodhya case

New Delhi, More than 10 years after a Supreme Court judgement paved way for introduction of the <keyword id="20335981" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="nota" source="keywords">NOTA</keyword> button on EVM for polls, the number of voters choosing it still remains low, with the experts dubbing it as a "toothless tiger" with no implications on the results. NOTA (None of the Above) was introduced in India through the Supreme Court's judgement in September 2013. The need to introduce NOTA was felt to discourage the parties from fielding tainted candidates. The Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to make necessary provision in the ballot papers/EVMs so that the voters can decide not to vote for any of the candidates in the fray. Introduced in 2013, the NOTA option on electronic voting machines has its own symbol - a ballot paper with a black cross across it. After the Supreme Court order in September 2013, the Election Commission added the NOTA button on the EVMs as the last option on the voting panel. One ballot unit has 16 buttons. Before the apex court order, those not inclined to vote for any candidate had the option of filling what is popularly called form 49-O. But filling out the form at the polling station under Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, compromised the secrecy of the voter. However, even as NOTA has secured over 1.29 crore votes in the state assembly elections and the <keyword id="19895394" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="lok-sabha" source="keywords">Lok Sabha</keyword> elections combined in the last five years, the number of candidates with criminal records has increased in both the general and the assembly elections. According to a report by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), the share of MPs with declared criminal cases against them has been increasing in the last decade. While 30 per cent elected MPs had criminal cases against them in 2009, which went up. Of the 543 winners analysed by the ADR in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, 162 (30 per cent) had declared criminal cases against them, with 76 (14 per cent) had serious criminal cases against them. In 2019, the share of MPs with criminal and serious criminal cases increased to 43 per cent and 29 per cent. "NOTA has made no difference as far as criminality is concerned, in fact the number of candidates with criminal cases has increased," Major General (Retd) Anil Verma, Head of ADR, told PTI. "The concept of NOTA was that some pressure would be on the parties not to field tainted candidates. It has not happened," he said. Overall in different state and general elections, votes polled on NOTA have been between .5 per cent to 1.5per cent, according to data compiled by the ADR. It secured around 1.06 per cent votes in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, and among states, highest was when it got 1.98 percent of the total votes in the 2018 Chhattisgarh Assembly polls. The lowest number of votes NOTA in the Lok Sabha was 100 votes in Lakshadweep, and among the state polls, it secured the lowest percentage of vote share - 0.46 percent in both the Delhi State Assembly Elections, 2020, and the Mizoram State Assembly Elections, 2018. "Unfortunately, it turned out to be a toothless tiger. It merely provided a platform to express dissent or one's anger for political parties to take note and nothing more," <keyword id="20887282" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="maj-gen-verma" source="keywords">Maj Gen Verma</keyword> (Retd) said. He, however, pointed out that overall, the percentage of NOTA votes in seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribe has been slightly higher, which may indicate there are more grievances among these groups. "In the reserved constituencies, we have seen the percentage of NOTA votes are higher. Perhaps the tribals and SCs have more grievances so they go in larger numbers for NOTA," he said. Constituency wise, NOTA has secured as high as 27,500 votes in Maharashtra's Latur Rural constituency, a seat reserved for the SC community, over 13 per cent of the total votes. NOTA got the second spot, with Congress' Dhiraj Deshmukh winning with over 67 per cent of the total votes. In 'Red Alert Constituencies', the seats with three or more candidates with criminal cases contesting the elections, NOTA secured 26, 77,616 votes (26.77 lakhs) in the state assembly elections since 2018. It ranges from 1.63 per cent in Bihar in 217 red alert constituencies to 0.43 per cent in Delhi. In the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, the highest number of NOTA votes (51,660) were polled in Bihar's Gopalganj, another reserved SC constituency, where it secured the third spot getting 5.03 per cent of the total votes. Axis India chairman <keyword id="20816878" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="pradeep-gupta" source="keywords">Pradeep Gupta</keyword> said there is a requirement to give more teeth to the NOTA option. "I believe that candidates, who have lost against NOTA should not get a chance to contest again. That is what the logic is all about. Since there is no such rule, many voters think what is the point of choosing NOTA," Gupta told PTI. "In 2014, 1.08 pc voters chose NOTA, the percentage was 1.06 pc in 2019. It is a sizeable number but I believe it is more due to error and less due to intention," Gupta said. "But if a rule is brought in barring the rejected candidates from contesting again, I believe the number will go up like anything. The political parties understand the sensitivity of this and that is why I believe no one will favour such a law and hence NOTA is a toothless option," he added. Calls have also been made for scrapping NOTA. Former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel had last year sought scrapping NOTA, stating that in certain cases it polled more votes than winning margin. In 2018, the Supreme Court had ruled that NOTA option should not be given in the <keyword id="19895369" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="rajya-sabha" source="keywords">Rajya Sabha</keyword> elections.

None of the Above or NOTA toothless without right to reject, say experts

Indian billionaire <keyword id="6364080" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="binny-bansal">Binny Bansal</keyword>, is an internet entrepreneur who co-founded Flipkart along with Sachin Bansal in 2007 and stayed with the company until 2018 when Walmart bought it over. Here are a few <keyword id="8866696" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="interesting-facts-about-Binny-bansal">interesting facts about Binny Bansal</keyword> some of which will inspire you and the others may be a warning. From Chandigarh to IIT Delhi Binny Bansal hailed from Chandigarh, the common capital of Punjab and Haryana. Sachin bansal, his business partner too was from the same place. They met each other at IIT, Delhi as students of Computer Science Engineering before they set up Flipkart. The maker of unique car sensors After graduating from IIT-Delhi, Binny started his career with a research and development firm, Sarnoff Corporation, India where he designed car sensors that were programmed to give automatic beep sounds if the driver changed lanes without giving signal. Building a business and losing it all <a href="https://successstory.com/people/binny-bansal">Binny said he founded Flipkart after</a> Google rejected him twice, once in 2005 and then in 2006. Before starting Flipkart, Binny worked for Amazon for about nine months and in 2007, Binny and Sachin launched Flipkart, with a capital of ₹4 lakh, as a platform to sell books. Flipkart started in a small flat in Koramangala delivering books ordered online. It is said that Sachin dreamt of big ideas and Binny executed them. During the initial days, both of them took turns to deliver the consignments on a scooter. He served as a Chief Operating Officer until 2016 where he earned a reputation for being ‘The Operational Guy’, and ‘The Executioner’. He became the CEO in 2016 and then the Group CEO in 2017. The employees at Flipkart <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/newsbuzz/binny-bansal-once-flipkarts-engine-now-the-kart-runs-without-him/articleshow/66629215.cms">described Binny as a calm and highly approachable person</a>. Though he ran a multi-million dollar firm so successfully, he was always willing to learn to improve himself. He participated in a <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Companies/VVgc0VII28w6w2aSQ4V0dP/Flipkarts-other-Bansal-comes-to-the-fore.html">personality training and leadership coaching in 2014</a>. From a small beginning, Binny Bansal, along with his friend Sachin Bansal, turned Flipkart into a massive online e-commerce venture that was bought over by Walmart in 2018 for a whopping $16 billion. Binny Bansal, the billionaire According to Forbes, Binny Bansal has a net worth of $ 1.3 billion. In 2017, <a href="http://www.skillstic.com/binny-bansal-biography/">India Today</a> ranked him in the 26th position along with Sachin Bansal among the 50 most powerful people. <a href="http://www.skillstic.com/binny-bansal-biography/">TIME named the two friends</a> among the 100 most influential people in 2016. The fall from grace Binny Bansal stepped down from his position as CEO of the company in November, 2018 following an internal review after an allegation of personal misconduct. Although the allegation was taken down, it was Binny Bansal’s lack of transparency in the matter that cost him his job. "While the investigation did not find evidence to corroborate the complainant's assertions against Binny, it did reveal other lapses in judgement, particularly a lack of transparency, related to how Binny responded to the situation. Because of this, we have accepted his decision to resign," <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghabahree/2018/11/13/flipkart-ceo-binny-bansal-resigns-after-probe-into-personal-misconduct/#4a3e39f55ac3">Flipkart had</a> said in the statement then. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/interesting-facts-about-ola-founder-bhavish-aggarwal/articleshow/71186840.cms">Ola Founder Bhavish Aggarwal</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/10-interesting-facts-about-ratan-tata-that-you-should-know/articleshow/69914798.cms">Facts about Ratan Tata</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/interesting-facts-about-oyo-founder-ritesh-agarwal/articleshow/70417612.cms">Ola founder Ritesh Agarwal</a>

Interesting facts about Binny Bansal, the co-founder and former ceo of Flipkart to inspire you

<ul class="summary-list"><li><keyword id="3658" type="COUNTRY" weightage="60" keywordseo="India">India</keyword>'s central bank confirmed on Monday that <keyword id="2420795" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="cryptocurrencies">cryptocurrencies</keyword> and exchanges are not banned.</li><li>A three-year-old circular that barred banks from <keyword id="2721952" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="crypto">crypto</keyword> transactions is no longer valid, the RBI said.</li><li>"The new RBI circular clearly confirms the right to do business with crypto firms," crypto exchange ZebPay's co-CEO said.</li></ul>India's central bank clarified on Monday that an old order forbidding financial institutions from supporting cryptocurrency transactions had been struck down by the country's highest court in 2020, allowing investors to breathe a sigh of relief.<a href="https://rbi.org.in/Scripts/BS_CircularIndexDisplay.aspx?Id=12103">In a new note</a>, the regulator said banks should not cite its <a href="https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/FS_Notification.aspx?Id=11243&amp;fn=2&amp;Mode=0p;Mode=0">2018 circular</a> as a reason to disallow trades in digital currencies as it had been "set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court" last year."The circular is no longer valid from the date of the Supreme Court judgement, and therefore cannot be cited or quoted from," the note stated.The latest order, addressed to all commercial and co-operative banks, followed local media reports that some financial firms, including the country's largest banks, had advised investors against dealing in digital currencies."It's amazing to see @RBI clarifying &amp; helping solve uncertainty for crypto in India," Nischal Shetty, founder and CEO of Indian crypto exchange founder WazirX, <a href="https://twitter.com/NischalShetty/status/1399579000624713732">said in a tweet</a>. "There are over 1.5 crore Indians in crypto. This news has brought joy and confidence to everyone in the sector."Read More: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/crypto-trader-shares-favorite-strategies-bullish-sectors-bitcoin-ether-defi-2021-5" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A senior crypto trader at a $500 million digital asset manager shares his favorite trading strategies to generate 'riskless profits' - and the 3 sectors of the nascent market that he is most bullish on</a>Still, the RBI order directs institutions to continue to perform due diligence processes before providing services. "This is positive news for the entire crypto industry - businesses, stakeholders, and investors," Avinash Shekhar, co-CEO of crypto exchange ZebPay, told Insider. "Investing in crypto has always been 100% legal in India and the new RBI circular clearly confirms the right to do business with crypto firms."He added that the RBI's communication about due diligence is a welcome move that could strengthen the relationship with banking and payment gateway partners, and make crypto investments accessible to more Indian investors.The crypto industry in India still awaits further direction from the government in the form of a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/15/india-plans-cryptocurrency-ban-will-penalize-miners-and-traders.html">new law</a> that reportedly address criminal possession, issuance, and crypto mining.<a href="https://markets.businessinsider.com/currencies/btc-usd">Bitcoin</a> was little changed on Tuesday, trading 1% higher around $36,196. The digital token is up 25% so far this year.

India's central bank confirms cryptocurrencies aren't banned - and says its 2018 order barring banks from crypto transactions is no longer valid

New Delhi, Nov 18 () Fortis Healthcare on Monday said it is exploring legal means with respect to the Supreme Court judgment that found the company guilty of contempt for violating the court's earlier order.
The healthcare firm said it is exploring legal means to address the case in an expeditious manner.
The SC on Friday held former Ranbaxy promoters Malvinder Singh and Shivinder Singh guilty of contempt of court for violating its earlier order, asking them not to divest their shares in Fortis Healthcare.
It has been advised that the open offer made by IHH Healthcare Berhad to the Fortis shareholders to acquire 26 per cent stake at Rs 170 per share continues to remain in abeyance and would be adjudicated upon in conjunction with the hearing of the contempt petition, Fortis Healthcare said in a BSE filing.
"The Hon'ble Court has issued a suo moto notice of contempt to Fortis Healthcare Ltd for violating the Court order dated December 14, 2018," it added.
The company is currently evaluating the judgement and exploring legal means to address it in an expeditious manner keeping in mind the best interest of all its stakeholders, Fortis Healthcare said.
"The Hon'ble Court has vide the notice sought an enquiry into consummation of the acquisition of healthcare assets from RHT Health Trust by the company," it added.
The court has also sought an enquiry into whether the subscription by IHH to the shares of the company was undertaken after the status quo order was issued on December 14, 2018 and accordingly, if such subscription was in violation of this status quo order, Fortis Healthcare said.
"The company would be appropriately responding to these concerns of the Hon'ble Court by providing cogent evidence," it added.
The company will take this occasion to present facts before the Court that demonstrate that no part of the proceeds from the IHH transaction were paid to Malvinder Mohan Singh, Shivinder Mohan Singh or any of their controlled entities in anyway, Fortis Healthcare said.
The company would also present before the Supreme Court that the IHH transaction was consummated on November 13, 2018 which was more than a month before the status quo order was passed and the same would be adduced before the court during the contempt proceedings, Fortis Healthcare said.
It would also present that the IHH transaction was done through fresh preferential allotment of shares of the company and and due approvals were sought for the same through an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders held on August 13, 2018, the firm said.
On the RHT transaction, which was consummated on January 15, 2019, Fortis said it was undertaken in the best interest of the company and at the time of consummation of the transaction, to the best of the its knowledge the erstwhile promoters or any of their controlled entities were not unit-holders in the RHT Health Trust," it added.
As a result of this transaction, Fortis bought back hospital properties worth around Rs 4,666 crore by acquiring securities in the RHT Trust's Indian entities that had ownership of these properties, the company said.
In an announcement to Bursa Malaysia, IHH Healthcare has also said that, it "remains committed to proceed with the Fortis Open Offer once the stay is lifted by the Supreme Court of India".
The next hearing date for this matter is February 3, 2020. IHH is seeking appropriate legal advice on this matter and will subsequently decide on the future course of action, it added. AKT AKT BAL
BAL

You Searched For "india judgements 2018" and got 12 results

10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018

10 landmark judgements India’s Supreme Court passed in 2018

Prabhjote Gill

Here are 5 things you should know about Ranjan Gogoi, the new Chief Justice of India

Dilsher Dhillon

Mumbai can have dance bars again but conditions apply

Sriram Iyer

India’s public policy think tank is reportedly planning an index to rank the annual performance of judges

Dilsher Dhillon

SC strikes down electoral bond scheme, terms it unconstitutional

PTI

India’s 10% quota for jobs for ‘economically weaker sections’ to go into effect next month

BI India Bureau

In India, Gods, rivers, and animals can pay taxes, hold property, sue, and get sued⁠— and that’s an important factor in the Ayodhya case

BI India Bureau

None of the Above or NOTA toothless without right to reject, say experts

PTI

Interesting facts about Binny Bansal, the co-founder and former ceo of Flipkart to inspire you

BI India Bureau

India's central bank confirms cryptocurrencies aren't banned - and says its 2018 order barring banks from crypto transactions is no longer valid

Shalini Nagarajan

Exploring legal options to address contempt notice by SC: Fortis Healthcare

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides