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

The <keyword id="6371973" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Karnataka-high-court" source="Orion">Karnataka High Court</keyword> on Monday struck down provisions of the <keyword id="6354780" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="karnataka" source="Orion">Karnataka</keyword> Police (Amendment) Act, 2021 that banned online games. The division bench headed by the Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Krishna S. Dixit gave the order. The bench said in its order that in the 'Karnataka Act number 28/2021 to the extent the provisions, (not the entire Act) declared to be ultra vires to the Constitution of India and struck down. The consequences of striking down the provisions shall follow.' "However, nothing in this judgment shall be construed to prevent an appropriate legislation be brought about concerning the subject i.e; betting and gambling in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. A writ of mandamus is issued restraining the respondents from interfering with online gaming business and allied activities of the petitioners," the order said. The Karnataka Police (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was mooted by ruling BJP to amend the Karnataka Police Act 1963, in the Monsoon session. The BJP leaders claimed that they were introducing the Bill to ban online gaming in the interest of people. The law included all forms of wagering or betting in connection with any game of chance barring horse racing. However, the new law was opposed by online gaming companies and it was said that the policy would affect the prospectus of the city which is emerging as a hub of online gaming companies. The new Act banned all formats of online games involving wagering, betting and gambling of all nature and forms in the state. Under the new legislation, online gaming was considered a non-bailable offence with a fine of Rs 1 lakh and imprisonment up to three years. Along with banning games of skills, the government had also categorised online games using electronic means and virtual currency, electronic transfer of funds in connection with any game as gambling. The new legislation was passed in the Monsoon session by both the Houses of the legislature in Karnataka. Mobile Premier League (MPL) was one of the first companies to stall its operations in Karnataka. Paytm First Games was also locked. The online gaming companies moved to the court questioning the new legislation. Similar law was also challenged in Tamil Nadu and online gaming operators got relief against the government order from the High Court. The Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) had stated that the new legislation by the government will dent the image of Karnataka as a startup hub and the state exchequer will see a huge revenue deficit. It also maintained that with the new legislation offshore gamblers will flourish. Sources say that the state has more than 100 gaming companies with a workforce of 4,000. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/international/news/tech-giant-tencent-is-limiting-kids-access-to-its-gaming-platform-and-only-allowing-them-14-hours-of-play-during-chinas-4-week-school-break/articleshow/88974669.cms">Tech giant Tencent is limiting kids' access to its gaming platform and only allowing them 14 hours of play during China's 4-week school break</a>

Karnataka High Court quashes law banning online gaming, calls it unconstitutional

<ul><li><keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> to hear a plea on a law prohibiting betting and wagering in online games.</li><li>The <keyword id="6354780" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="karnataka" source="Orion">Karnataka</keyword> government contended that cybercrime has become a major issue in the last three years while emphasising the need for a law against online gaming.</li><li>Senior advocates <keyword id="195903" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="mukul-rohatgi" source="Orion">Mukul Rohatgi</keyword>, A.M Singhvi, and <keyword id="1326066" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="shyam-divan" source="Orion">Shyam Divan</keyword>, represented the gaming companies' associations.</li></ul>The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a plea by the Karnataka government, challenging the Karnataka High Court judgment, which struck down provisions of law prohibiting betting and wagering in online games. Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, A.M Singhvi, and Shyam Divan, represented the gaming companies' associations, submitted before a bench of Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and V. Ramasubramanian that the issue was whether it was game of skill or chance or gambling. The Karnataka government contended that cybercrime has become a major issue and cited filing of 28,000 cases in the last three years, while emphasising the need for a law against online gaming to maintain public order. It further argued that people have died by suicide and the online gaming has ruined many families, therefore it was necessary to deal with its ill effects. The state government's plea said: "The Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021 made criminalised wagering, betting or risking money on the unknown result of an event." On February 14 this year, the high court struck down the government's ban and the legal provision which criminalised playing games of skill, including online games, and betting. The top court issued notice to online gaming industry body All India Gaming Federation and skill-based gaming firms. It directed to tag this matter with a similar matter, where the Tamil Nadu government has challenged the judgment by the Madras High Court. The Karnataka High Court had said that the Act was unconstitutional and there cannot be any ban on online games of skill. The state government contended before the apex court that the high court had grossly erred in not taking into account the material produced by it in connection with cases registered by the police authorities. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/gautam-adani-just-1-billion-away-from-becoming-the-second-richest-person-in-the-world-as-per-bloomberg-index-report/articleshow/94242575.cms">Gautam Adani is $1 billion away from beating Jeff Bezos as the second richest person in the world</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/tech-glitch-man-loses-11677-crore-windfall-from-demat-account-in-hours/articleshow/94219695.cms">Tech Glitch: Man loses ₹11,677 crore windfall from demat account in hours</a>

SC admits Karnataka govt plea on online gaming

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday declined to entertain a plea by e-commerce giants <keyword id="18635" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Amazon">Amazon</keyword> and <keyword id="6354742" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Flipkart">Flipkart</keyword>, saying they must face inquiry by Competition Commission of India (CCI) for anti-competitive practices. A bench headed by Chief Justice <keyword id="2797471" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="N-V-Ramana">N.V. Ramana</keyword> and comprising justices Vineet Saran and Surya Kant said: "Big organizations like you ( Flipkart and Amazon) should volunteer for inquiry... Inquiry has to be conducted." The bench declined to interfere with the orders of the <keyword id="6371973" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</keyword>, which refused to interfere with the preliminary enquiry ordered by the CCI into their alleged anti-competitive practices. The top court emphasized that the CCI inquiry must go on. However, the court accepted the request made by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi for extending the time for the companies to reply to CCI. The e-commerce companies had moved the apex court challenging the Karnataka High Court order. The bench said it sees no reason to interfere in the high court order, and seeing that time granted is expiring on 9 August, "we extend it by 4 weeks". On July 23, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the plea by Amazon and Flipkart against a probe initiated by CCI for the alleged violation of competition law. A division bench comprising justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Natraj Rangaswamy passed the order on a batch of appeals moved by the e-commerce companies challenging a June 11 order passed by a single judge of the high court. The bench noted that by no stretch of imagination the inquiry can be quashed at this stage and the appellants shouldn't be afraid of investigation by CCI. The bench said: "In the considered opinion of the court, appeals filed by appellants are devoid of merit and deserved to be dismissed..." Amazon had moved Karnataka High Court against a CCI order which had called for a director general (DG) level investigation into allegations of anti-competitive conduct in the online sale of smartphones on its platform. The Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh (DVM), the informant before the CCI, had alleged predatory pricing, deep discounting, preferential seller listing, and exclusive partnerships, among others, against Amazon and Flipkart. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/amazon-great-freedom-festival-get-last-day-deals-and-discounts/articleshow/85173017.cms">Amazon Great Freedom Festival 2021: Best last day tech deals and offers</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/gadgets/news/vivo-launched-its-y53s-with-64mp-rear-camera-in-india-on-monday/articleshow/85173234.cms">Vivo launched its Y53s with 64MP rear camera in India on Monday</a>

Supreme Court asks Amazon, Flipkart to volunteer for CCI probe

Ecommerce website Flipkart and camera maker Nikon are at loggerheads. The latter had put a statutory warning in its website advising people not to buy its products through online stores, which has consequently provoked Flipkart to file a case in the Karnataka High Court. 
 
Nikon India's caution notice dated June 16, 2014, said ecommerce websites "like Flipkart, Snapdeal are not our authorised partner/dealer" and asked consumers to "check the warranty entitlements while buying from online portals." 
 
"They have singled us out and they cannot make such statements," said a person familiar with Flipkart's case. 
 
"We are selling the same product and therefore, we are asking the high court to restrain Nikon from publishing the statement on their website." The case was filed on August 3 and the next hearing is scheduled on August 21, according to the court's website. Nikon India said it received a letter from an advocate regarding the issue and is studying it. It declined to comment further, saying the matter is sub judice. However, Flipkart didn’t respond to any media query. 
 
"Advisories discouraging customers to buy from online marketplaces like Snapdeal are unwarranted," a spokesperson for the ecommerce company said in an email to the financial daily, adding that they also are "against the principles of free trade and commerce." 
 
Products available on Snapdeal carry the same genuine and legitimate title and hence are eligible for warranty as applicable to any off-line purchases, the Snapdeal spokesperson said. 
 
New Delhi-based Snapdeal had filed a case against kitchen appliance maker Kaff last year for a similar advisory on its website. 
 
Last year, companies, including LG, Lenovo and Toshiba, issued advisories on their websites stating that they had not authorised the sale of their products on online marketplaces.

Flipkart and Nikon battle it out at the courts!

Thiruvananthapuram, The <keyword id="6357505" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kerala-high-court">Kerala High Court</keyword> on Wednesday issued a notice to Indian cricket team captain <keyword id="6354486" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="virat-kohli">Virat Kohli</keyword>, actors Thammanna and Aju Vargheese on a petition seeking ban on <keyword id="3862940" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Online-rummy">online rummy</keyword> after victims alleged brand ambassadors play a significant role in getting youth addicted. Kohli, Thamanna and Varghese are brand ambassadors of online rummy and hence the notice. The high court has also issued notices to the state government and called for its response on the same. The petitioner had complained to the high court that several people have lost their lives in the country after losing huge amounts of money by playing the online game and that it should be banned. Vineeth, 27, had committed suicide at Kuttichal in Thiruvananthapuram a fortnight ago. He had lost Rs 21 lakh. Sajesh, 32, who had lost a huge amount playing online rummy told <keyword id="105681" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="IANS">IANS</keyword>: "The intervention of the honourable High court is welcome as I know that several people have lost huge amount of money playing this online game and I myself have lost more than Rs 6 lakh. "The brand ambassador's indeed play a big role in attracting the gullible youth in playing this game which soon turns into an addiction. I had to seek professional medical help to come out of this addiction and the court must ban this game in India."

Kerala HC notice issued a notice to Virat Kohli on a petition seeking ban on online rummy

In a major relief to major tech giant <keyword id="2210169" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="xiaomi-india" source="Orion">Xiaomi India</keyword>, the <keyword id="6371973" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="karnataka-high-court" source="Orion">Karnataka High Court</keyword> has permitted it to take overdrafts from banks and make payments. However, the court has excluded the payment of technology royalty. Vacation Judge Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav on Thursday also extended the interim order till May 23 and stated that the matter is now between the banks and the petitioner company. The court had given conditional stay on the order given by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on April 29 to seize a whopping Rs 5,513.3 crore amount. The ED has taken the step after invoking the <keyword id="88944" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="foreign-exchange-management-act" source="Orion">Foreign Exchange Management Act</keyword>, 1999. Senior advocate S. Ganeshan argued that <keyword id="874458" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="xiaomi" source="Orion">Xiaomi</keyword> India was being targeted as it is a Chinese company and other companies are allowed to make payments of technology royalty. Seeking clarification on the earlier interim order on May 5, he argued that banks are not allowing Xiaomi to make remittances in foreign exchange for imports following the court order. He explained that the company is required to make payments for foreign companies in connection with manufacturing and marketing smartphones. Contesting this Additional Solicitor General M.B. Nargund said that the authorities have no complaints if Xiaomi is agreeable to keep the seized amount in the bank and use the remaining amount. He brought to the notice of the court that on April 24 and 29, before the ED passed the order to seize Xiaomi's bank accounts, there was a transfer of around Rs 1,500 crore from the company's bank accounts as per the available information. However, Xiaomi is maintaining that royalty payments made to three companies abroad would not violate the FEMA Act. The company further maintained that the I-T department itself had allowed it as a value added activity. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/china-ups-its-attacks-on-india-as-xiaomi-accuses-ed-of-physical-violence-threats/articleshow/91458920.cms">China wants India to treat Chinese companies fairly as Xiaomi claims ED threatened its executives of physical violence</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/chinese-state-media-says-indias-seizure-of-over-5500-crore-from-xiaomi-could-be-seen-as-a-crackdown-on-chinese-companies/articleshow/91434053.cms">Chinese state media says India's seizure of over ₹5,500 crore from Xiaomi could be seen as a crackdown on Chinese companies</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/corporates/news/xiaomis-manu-kumar-jain-has-been-reportedly-summoned-by-the-enforcement-directorate/articleshow/90803402.cms">Xiaomi’s Manu Kumar Jain has been reportedly summoned by the Enforcement Directorate</a>

Karnataka High Court allows Xiaomi to take overdraft for payments, restricts royalty payment

Surge pricing is back! This time it’s has new aliases. Days after global taxi aggregator <keyword id="1042120" type="PERSON" weightage="100" keywordseo="Uber">Uber</keyword> rolled out its ‘upfront fares’ tariff, <keyword id="6354720" type="PERSON" weightage="100" keywordseo="Ola">Ola</keyword> has not been left wanting either. The Bengaluru-based online transport app has introduced ‘low peak pricing’. 
 
Have things changed? Well, yes and no. The earlier version of the app would display the surge pricing tariff as ‘1.5x’ or ‘1.8x’, now a customer gets to see the actual rate per kilometer applicable at the time of booking. Ola claims this lets one know beforehand how much his/her ride will cost. 
 
That’s all fine. However, this is not the death of surge pricing as the tariff is still based on the demand, traffic and other factors. As for Uber, its ‘upfront fares’ is a clear indication that surge pricing is here to stay. 
 
This comes after the two online taxi aggregators were directed by several state governments to end surge pricing based on a barrage of protests and complaints from customers and taxi unions. Uber had rolled back its surge model in Delhi last month, agreeing to charge a per-kilometer fare and not exceed the government-prescribed rate. The Karnataka government has even threatened to ban Uber in the state if it doesn’t say goodbye to surge pricing. 
 
On Monday, Ola filed in the Karnataka High Court saying that it has complied with all requirements to continue operating. This was to counter to a petition by rival Uber India which challenged the Karnataka On-Demand Transportation Technology Aggregator Rules, 2016. 
 
Both Ola and Uber have been fighting a bloody price war. Both firms have been offering discounts to customers to gain more market share. 
 
<a href="http://d.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/fastcompany/imagecache/1280/poster/2015/07/3049296-poster-p-1-tech-forecastuber-will-invest-1-billion-in-india-by-2016.jpg">Image Source</a>

Uber and Ola have rolled out surge pricing, but under new garbs

<ul><li><keyword id="6371973" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="karnataka-high-court" source="Orion">Karnataka High Court</keyword> has rejected Chinese firm <keyword id="874458" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="xiaomi" source="Orion">Xiaomi</keyword>'s plea against the seizure of Rs 5,551.27 crore.</li><li>A single-judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna, on Friday, though dismissed the petition, upheld its maintainability.</li></ul><keyword id="6354321" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="bengaluru" source="Orion">Bengaluru</keyword>, Karnataka High Court has rejected Chinese firm Xiaomi's plea against the seizure of Rs 5,551.27 crore from its bank accounts by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). A single-judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna, on Friday, though dismissed the petition, upheld its maintainability. The Chinese technology company is facing charges of violations of the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA). The bench observed that challenge to the Constitutional validity of Section 37A of the Act by the petitioner is held to be maintainable, on the fulcrum of the allegation that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. As Article 14 is person centric whereas Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are citizen centric. Appearing for the central government and the ED, Additional Solicitor General M.B. Nargund Amaintained that Xiaomi is a foreign entity and can not maintain writ petition. Earlier, counsels for <keyword id="2210169" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="xiaomi-india" source="Orion">Xiaomi India</keyword> had argued that the firm was being targetted as it is a Chinese company and other companies are allowed to make payments of technology royalty. They have also brought to the notice of the court that banks are not allowing Xiaomi to make remittances in foreign exchange for imports. They argued that the company is required to make payments for foreign companies in connection with manufacturing and marketing smartphones. Contesting this Additional Solicitor General Nargund had explained that the authorities had no complaints if Xiaomi is agreeable to keep the seized amount in the bank and use remaining amount. He brought to the notice of the court that on April 24 and 29, before the ED passed the order to seize Xiaomi's bank accounts, there was a transfer of around Rs 1,500 crore from the company's bank accounts as per the available information. However, <keyword id="2402890" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="xiomi" source="Orion">Xiomi</keyword> is maintaining that royalty payments made to three companies abroad would not violate the FEMA Act. The company further maintained that the IT department itself had allowed it as a value added activity. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/bard-to-magi-googles-latest-weapon-in-the-battle-for-search-supremacy/articleshow/99576251.cms">From Bard to Magi: Google's latest weapon in the battle for search supremacy</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/ai-generated-images-and-videos-a-game-changer-or-a-threat-to-authenticity/articleshow/99560443.cms">AI-generated images and videos: A game-changer or a threat to authenticity?</a>

K'taka HC rejects plea by Chinese firm Xiaomi challenging ED

<ul><li>The lawyer claims that school-going children are losing their interest in studies.</li><li>He also says that these children become aggressive and go into depression when they’re asked to stop playing <keyword id="4998506" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="pubg">PUBG</keyword> Mobile.</li><li>The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the IT Ministry to decide on the matter.</li></ul>Popular battle-royale game PUBG Mobile might be banned in India, yet again. A lawyer HC Arora, has filed a PIL against the game in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, saying the game is as addictive as a drug. “School going children who are losing interest in studies have become addicted to the game. The parents of such children are helpless. In case they insist the children to stop playing it, they become aggressive and go into depression,” Arora said in his <a href="https://www.indiatvnews.com/technology/news-pubg-mobile-ban-again-in-india-582250">PIL</a>. This comes almost a year after PUBG Mobile was banned in Ahmedabad, Rajkot, Surat, Vadodara and Bhavnagar in India in March 2019. The local police even<a href="https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/features/story/10-arrested-for-playing-pubg-in-gujarat-what-was-govt-warning-why-arrests-and-everything-you-need-to-know-1477832-2019-03-14"> arrested</a> several youngsters for playing PUBG Mobile during the ban. But the ban was lifted within a few weeks. In the last few years, many cases of violence has been reported over the game. A <a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/25-year-old-kills-father-over-pubg-in-karnataka/story-lYkVFMy0WuvYMD3FOyIpbI.html">Karnataka based 25 year </a>old killer his father who was stopping him from playing the game. Another <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/pubg-game-addiction-man-kills-parents-delhi-police-5398568/">Delhi teen who </a>killed his family was also known to be an PUBG addict. Arora’s PIL claims that the game ‘normalises’ violence, which affects the mental health of players. Not the first time someone has wanted a ban on PUBG Mobile This is not the first time cases have been filed against the game. Last year, a 11-year old child Ahad Nizam<a href="https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/bombay-high-court-directs-it-ministry-to-review-act-on-pubg/article26823651.ece"> filed</a> a PIL in the Bombay High Court for reasons similar to that of Arora’s PIL. “PUBG Mobile promotes violence, murder, aggression, loot, gaming addiction, and cyberbullying,” said Nizam’s PIL. The Bombay High Court sought IT Ministry’s advise on the matter. To this, the ministry<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/difficult-to-ban-pubg-indian-government-leaves-it-up-to-the-parents/articleshow/70603348.cms"> responded</a> by saying that it is “technically difficult to ban the game”. That could be true, as the United States has tried it and failed. “Some US states, including California, have previously passed laws to regulate the sale of certain types of videos to children, but the US Supreme Court invalidated the same saying that video games formed part of the constitutional right to free speech and hence could not be regulated,” said a <a href="http://www.nishithdesai.com/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Research%20Papers/The_Curious_Case_of_the_Indian_Gaming_Laws.pdf">report by law firm </a>Nishith Desai associates. Can PUBG Mobile be banned for being addictive and promoting gambling? However, the correlation between excessive gaming and violence has not been completely tested in Indian courts. But there is precedence where courts allowed games that involve skill and strategy. That is how fantasy sporting platform Dream 11 won its <a href="http://www.nishithdesai.com/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Research%20Papers/The_Curious_Case_of_the_Indian_Gaming_Laws.pdf">case</a> in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Bombay High Court also issued a similar ruling. Yet many players, parents even schools, colleges and hostels too are concerned about the addictive effects of PUBG. And, some action could be taken on medical grounds. There have been reports of PUBG Mobile players falling sick after playing the game continuously for extended periods of time. A fitness trainer in Jammu was<a href="https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/pubg-mobile-makes-player-go-mad-admitted-to-hospital-under-serious-trauma-1427705-2019-01-10"> reportedly</a> admitted to a hospital after playing PUBG Mobile for 10 days straight. A 20-year old<a href="https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/trends/pubg-mobile-twenty-year-old-dies-after-drinking-chemical-instead-of-water-while-playing-game/story/391952.html"> reportedly</a> drank acid instead of water while playing the game. He died before he could be attended to by doctors. The World Health Organization too <a href="https://www.who.int/features/qa/gaming-disorder/en/">classified</a> ‘gaming disorder’ as a medical condition. “For gaming disorder to be diagnosed, the behaviour pattern must be of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning and would normally have been evident for at least 12 months,” said WHO. But very few people are coming forward to bell the cat and that includes creator of the game. Tencent had <a href="https://in.pcmag.com/mobile/129383/pubg-mobile-ban-could-india-be-getting-a-six-hour-playtime-restriction">tested</a> a ‘health reminder’ to restrict gaming to a maximum of six hours per day. It later backtracked on it and apologized for the ‘error’. That leaves players to see the error of their own ways. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-lite-mobile-game-in-india-gets-a-rap-from-narendra-modi-in-pariksha-pe-charcha-live/articleshow/67736283.cms">India’s prime minister has an advice for PUBG addicts</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/difficult-to-ban-pubg-indian-government-leaves-it-up-to-the-parents/articleshow/70603348.cms">‘Difficult to ban PUBG’: Indian government leaves it up to the parents</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/pubg-ban-india-healthy-gaming-experience-proposed/articleshow/68058605.cms">Faced with ban threats, PUBG is trying to placate Indian parents and the government</a>

India tried to ban PUBG Mobile many times but games are ‘technically’ difficult to ban, say experts

Bengaluru, May 7 () The 'CheckmateCovid' online chess tournament raised an amount of Rs 15 lakh, which was donated to the Karnataka Chief Minister's COVID-19 Relief Fund.A total of 19,245 players registered for the tournament, which had a total prize pool of Rs 10 lakh, a media release issued here said on Thursday.The tournamemt was conducted by Karnataka government along with the United Karnataka Chess Association and Mobile Premier League (MPL).GM Ankit Rajpara won the tournament, which was held on May 2 and 3.GM Bhakti Kulkarni won the award for the top-ranked female player and Shakuntala Devi won the award for top-ranked player above 60 years of age.The tournament saw a total of 2.37 lakh chess games."I thank all the players who participated and contributed to the CheckmateCovid Chess Tournament. We are glad to have collected a large amount for the CM's Covid Relief Fund. We must continue to come together and fight this crisis," said Karnataka Sports Minister CT Ravi.The matches were played in the Speed Chess format, with each player getting three minutes in the game. Winners were decided on the basis of maximum such games won over the two-day duration of the tournament. SS KHSKHS

You Searched For "Karnataka online gaming high court" and got 10 results

Karnataka High Court quashes law banning online gaming, calls it unconstitutional

IANS

SC admits Karnataka govt plea on online gaming

IANS

Supreme Court asks Amazon, Flipkart to volunteer for CCI probe

IANS

Flipkart and Nikon battle it out at the courts!

BI India Bureau

Kerala HC notice issued a notice to Virat Kohli on a petition seeking ban on online rummy

IANS

Karnataka High Court allows Xiaomi to take overdraft for payments, restricts royalty payment

IANS

Uber and Ola have rolled out surge pricing, but under new garbs

Saikat Pyne

K'taka HC rejects plea by Chinese firm Xiaomi challenging ED

IANS

India tried to ban PUBG Mobile many times but games are ‘technically’ difficult to ban, say experts

Rounak Jain

Online chess tourney helps raise Rs 15 lakh for COVID-19 relief fund

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides