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

From the internet shutdowns in Jammu and Kashmir to the 2012 Delhi gang rape and murder case — these are some of the orders and stated positions of the next Chief Justice of India NV Ramana

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

<ul><li>A committee of seven <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> judges is inclined to begin physical hearings in at least two or three of its 15 benches as early as next week, said sources familiar with the development. The top court could also begin hearings with some <keyword id="8036442" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="additional-safety-measures">additional safety measures</keyword>.</li><li>Since March 25, the top court has been taking up matters through video conferencing and even after the restrictions were relaxed, it has decided to continue to take up cases virtually.</li><li>The seven-judge committee headed by Justice N.V. Ramana, in the last week of July, had told the Bar leaders that it is not inclined to resume open court hearing for the time being, and told them the committee will meet again after two weeks to examine the matter</li></ul> A committee of seven Supreme Court judges is inclined to begin physical hearings in at least two or three of its 15 benches as early as next week, said sources familiar with the development. The top court could also begin hearings with some additional safety measures. According to Shivaji M. Jadhav, president of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA), the committee of seven judges, constituted by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, met the Bar leaders on Tuesday and "is seriously considering to start at least 2-3 physical courts from the next week". Since March 25, the top court has been taking up matters through video conferencing and even after the restrictions were relaxed, it has decided to continue to take up cases virtually. The seven-judge committee headed by Justice N.V. Ramana, in the last week of July, had told the Bar leaders that it is not inclined to resume open court hearing for the time being, and told them the committee will meet again after two weeks to examine the matter. "I may also add that the physical courts are in addition to virtual courts and people would have the option to do virtual hearing as well. Matters from the final hearing list published before the lockdown would be listed before the physical courts. A final decision would be taken by the Hon'ble Judges committee in a day or two", said Jadhav. He added that in the meantime the Registry would take necessary steps to prepare the courts for physical functioning. The judges' committee met Bar leaders such as Bar Council Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra, Supreme Court Bar Association President <keyword id="276004" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Dushyant-Dave">Dushyant Dave</keyword> and <keyword id="185208" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shivaji-Jadhav">Shivaji Jadhav</keyword> to discuss the process to resume physical hearings in the apex court. In June and July, the judges' committee did not agree to the demands of various lawyers' associations to resume regular courtroom hearings, and instead said that it will review it later. <keyword id="9751392" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="justices-ramana">Justices Ramana</keyword>, Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, U.U. Lalit, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and L.N. Rao are on the committee set up by the Chief Justice to examine the issues connected with the resumption of physical hearings. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-was-rushed-from-the-briefing-room-by-secret-service-after-a-shooting-outside-of-the-white-house/articleshow/77474005.cms">Trump was rushed from the briefing room by Secret Service after a shooting outside the White House</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/careers/news/mckinsey-facebook-amazon-nokia-and-some-other-companies-looking-for-a-product-manager-right-now/slidelist/77464438.cms">McKinsey, Facebook, Amazon, Nokia — and some other companies looking for a product manager right now</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/how-karan-bajaj-sold-his-less-than-18-month-old-startup-white-hat-jr-to-byjus/articleshow/77415329.cms">A WhatsApp message, six weeks of talks and a $300 million deal – how Karan Bajaj sold his less than 18-month old startup White Hat Jr to Byju’s</a>

Supreme Court likely to begin physical hearing in some courts from next week

The <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> will hear SEBIs petition, in an open court, seeking review of its August 5 judgment, which directed the market regulator to share certain documents with Reliance Industries Limited (RIL). A bench headed by Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Hima Kohli said: "Considering the facts and circumstances on record and the submissions advanced in the review petition, we deem it appropriate to allow application for listing of the instant petition in open court. Let this review petition be listed in court on October 12, 2022." <keyword id="35210" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="SEBI" source="Orion">SEBI</keyword> has refused to entertain RIL's request to share the privileged documents on the grounds that under the Sebi (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, the accused company has no right to seek information from it. The <keyword id="6356229" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="apex-court" source="Orion">apex court</keyword>, in its judgement, had rejected this stand of the market regulator. RIL had claimed that documents will exonerate it and its promoters from criminal prosecution initiated in a case related to the alleged irregularities in acquisition of its own shares between 1994 and 2000. Last week, a bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna had recused from hearing RIL's petition seeking to initiate contempt proceedings against SEBI for failing to provide certain documents to the company. On August 5, a bench led by then Chief Justice N.V. Ramana had said: "The approach of SEBI, in failing to disclose the documents, also raises concerns of transparency and fair trial. Opaqueness only propagates prejudice and partiality. Opaqueness is antithetical to transparency." The top court had said the market regulator should show fairness and furnish documents sought by RIL, and SEBI has a duty to act fairly, while conducting proceedings or initiating any action against the parties. RIL filed a contempt petition as SEBI has not shared three documents -- the two legal opinions by former apex court judge B.N. Srikrishna and former ICAI president Y.H. Malegam's report which examined the irregularities. The company claimed SEBI cannot continue to resist the production of these documents and it had also sent a notice to the regulator saying if documents were not received by August 18, then it will establish that SEBI does not want to comply with the apex court's judgment. In 2002, Chartered Accountant S. Gurumurthy filed a complaint with SEBI alleging irregularities by RIL, its associate companies and their directors/promoters, including <keyword id="3820" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="mukesh-ambani" source="Orion">Mukesh Ambani</keyword> and his wife, Nita; <keyword id="9171" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="anil-ambani" source="Orion">Anil Ambani</keyword> and his wife, Tina; and 98 others. The complaint cited the issue of two preferential placement of non-convertible debentures in 1994. SEBI had alleged that RIL along with Reliance Petroleum had circuitously funded the acquisition of its own shares in violation of the Sections 77 and 77A of the Companies Act, 1956. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/markets/news/sebi-tightens-disclosure-norms-for-ipo-brings-mutual-fund-transactions-under-the-gambit-of-insider-trading-rules/articleshow/94577801.cms">SEBI tightens disclosure norms for IPOs, brings mutual fund transactions under the gambit of insider trading rules</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/jio-will-launch-5g-for-the-entire-country-by-december-2023-mukesh-ambani/articleshow/94579338.cms">Jio will launch 5G for the entire country by December 2023: Mukesh Ambani</a>

SC to hear SEBI's review petition against RIL on Oct 12

The Centre on Tuesday again urged the <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> to urgently hear the matter connected with the validity of <keyword id="11939755" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="ews" source="Orion">EWS</keyword> quota in postgraduate courses in medical colleges. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, after failing to get the matter listed on Tuesday, requested a bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana to list the matter for hearing. Mehta emphasized that the matter needs to be considered on priority since resident doctors are protesting. The Chief Justice told Mehta that he has to constitute a special bench. Justice Ramana said: "Let me see tomorrow. This entire week is a miscellaneous week..." Mehta said the resident doctors are protesting and their concerns are genuine. The bench said: "If it is a three-judge bench matter, then it will be listed before a three-judge bench tomorrow". On Monday, Mehta asked a bench led by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud to advance the hearing on the matter to Tuesday from January 6. The Centre has told the top court that Rs 8 lakh income criterion for determining the EWS is much more stringent than the one for the OBC creamy layer. The Centre has accepted the report of a three-member panel constituted to revisit the EWS criteria. The panel, in its report, said: "Firstly, the EWS's criteria relates to the financial year prior to the year of application whereas the income criterion for the creamy layer in OBC category is applicable to gross annual income for three consecutive years." The panel added, "Secondly, in case of deciding the OBC creamy layer, income from salaries, agriculture and traditional artisanal professions are excluded from the consideration whereas the Rs 8 lakh criteria for EWS includes that from all sources, including farming. So, despite being the same cut-off number, their composition is different and hence, the two cannot be equated". The panel comprised Ajay Bhushan Pandey, former finance secretary; Prof V.K. Malhotra of ICSSR; and Sanjeev Sanyal, principal economic advisor to the government. The panel was set up on November 30. On November 25, the Centre informed the Supreme Court that it has taken a decision to revisit the criteria of Rs 8 lakh annual income limit for EWS criteria and added that a fresh decision will be taken within a period of 4 weeks. On October 21, the Supreme Court had questioned the Centre over adopting the criteria of OBC creamy layer of Rs 8 lakh annual income for granting reservations under the economic weaker section (EWS), despite the latter not suffering from social and educational backwardness. The top court told the Centre's counsel "You just cannot pull out eight lakh from thin air. You are making unequal equal by applying the Rs eight lakh limit". In an affidavit, the Centre had told the Supreme Court that its decision to fix Rs 8 Lakh income limit for OBC and economically weaker section (EWS) is not arbitrary in the <keyword id="6361994" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="neet" source="Orion">NEET</keyword> All India Quota, and it was finalised after considering diverse economic factors in different states. The top court is hearing writ petitions challenging 27 per cent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and 10 per cent reservation for EWS in all-India Quota seats for postgraduate medical courses. As many as 15 per cent seats in <keyword id="48426" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="mbbs" source="Orion">MBBS</keyword> and 50 per cent seats in MS and MD courses are filled through All India Quota from the candidates selected through NEET. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/delhi-resident-doctors-call-off-their-14-day-long-nationwide-strike-over-neet-pg-counselling/articleshow/88612843.cms">Delhi resident doctors call off their 14-day long nationwide strike over NEET-PG counselling</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/education/news/neet-pg-counselling-not-to-commence-till-supreme-court-decides-on-obc-ews-quota-says-centre/articleshow/87253992.cms">NEET-PG counselling not to commence till Supreme Court decides on OBC, EWS quota, says Centre</a>

Supreme Court agrees to hear Centre's plea on EWS quota for NEET-PG admissions

The <keyword id="6354952" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="delhi-government" source="Orion">Delhi government</keyword> has told the Supreme Court that it is ready to take steps like complete lockdown to control the local emission, which would help in bringing down the air pollution in the national capital, but added that it will have only a limited impact. In an affidavit, the Delhi government said: "GNCTD is ready to take steps like complete lockdown to control local emissions. However, such a step would be meaningful if it is implemented across the NCR areas in neighbouring states. Given Delhi's compact size, a lockdown would have limited impact on the air quality regime". The government said this issue would need to be addressed at the level of airshed involving NCR areas. The Delhi government, listing the steps taken so far, said no physical classes would be held in schools this week and the government officials would work from home, and private offices have also been advised to allow work-from-home for their employees. "All construction and demolition activities will be closed with immediate effect till November 17", said the affidavit. On November 13, the Supreme Court took a serious view of the severe air pollution in Delhi-NCR and suggested that if needed the government can declare a two-day lockdown to bring down the levels, which has been caused by stubble burning, vehicles, firecrackers, industries and dust. At the outset, a bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, that the "situation is very bad... In the house we are wearing masks. It is a bad situation". "How to control air pollution in Delhi, two days lockdown or what. How will people live in Delhi?" queried the Chief Justice. The top court will continue to hear the matter Monday. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/tarson-products-ipo-opens-today-and-closes-on-november-17/articleshow/87709719.cms">Tarson Products IPO opens today — Check close date, allotment date and other important details</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/international/news/elon-musk-mocks-bernie-sanders-over-tax-asks-if-he-should-sell-more-stock/articleshow/87710172.cms">lon Musk mocks Bernie Sanders over tax, asks if he should sell more stock</a>

Delhi government says it is ready to take steps like order complete lockdown to control air pollution

The <keyword id="375475" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="future-retail" source="Orion">Future Retail</keyword> counsel on Tuesday informed the Supreme Court that his client is broke and Amazon has driven the firm to its knees, after Amazon's counsel submitted that talks between the parties to settle legal disputes have failed and Reliance is taking over Future's shops. Senior advocate Harish Salve, representing Future Retail, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana that nothing has been transferred and the rent for the shops have not been paid for over two years. "We had no money, which is what we've been telling all forums. Landlords are terminating our leases," said Salve. He also said that Amazon was bringing them to their knees and they were broke. Salve's response came following submissions from senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, representing Amazon, that Reliance is taking over Future Retail stores, despite the highest court direction that no assets will be transferred. "It's been recorded, and during pendency the orders have been flouted...," said Subramanium. At the outset, Amazon counsel informed the top court that efforts at resolving a long-running dispute between his client and Future Retail, have failed. "The efforts did not work and the conversation is over. Nothing is happening," said Subramanium. The counsel for both parties agreed on resuming arbitration proceedings at the tribunal, which have been put on hold by the Delhi High Court. Salve added one can talk about the glory and grandeur of things, "but when we're broke, we're broke". He said the shops' takeover started 15 days ago. "We have no control. Reliance is taking action despite the ongoing litigation. Reliance is taking over. We can't do anything," said Salve. He further added that not one store has been surrendered and Reliance took away the boards as they're entitled to, all our assets are where they are. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Future Coupons, reiterated "the shops are there! What's the point of saying it's been taken over?" Salve added: "We can't do anything. What do we do? We haven't signed anywhere. In fact Mr Biyani went and protested." Another counsel for Amazon said, "So suddenly they are saying there's no money so the shops are taken over? Look at the conduct." The bench said, "Proceedings are going on and everything is happening. We're getting a feeling that by adjourning matter, we're being lenient." Subramanium said: "Let us go back to the tribunal...80 per cent shops surrendered to Reliance." After a detailed hearing, the top court allowed Amazon to file an application in the matter and scheduled the matter for further hearing on Wednesday. The top court was hearing Amazon's challenge against Delhi High Court's order staying further arbitration proceedings with the <keyword id="44949" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="future-group" source="Orion">Future Group</keyword> before the Singapore Arbitration Tribunal. Future Retail Ltd (FRL) entered into a Rs 24,713 crore deal with Reliance Retail to sell its business, which has been objected to by the US-based e-commerce giant Amazon. SEE ALSO <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/ecommerce/news/four-years-later-sachin-bansal-is-still-battling-eight-lawsuits-from-his-flipkart-days/articleshow/90202495.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Four years later, Sachin Bansal is still battling eight lawsuits from his Flipkart days</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/paytms-shares-hit-an-all-time-low-plunging-below-the-700-mark-after-rbi-pulls-up-its-payments-bank/articleshow/90193957.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Paytm’s shares hit an all-time low plunging below the ₹700-mark after RBI pulls up its payments bank</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/interview-you-will-be-able-to-own-bajaj-made-yulu-bikes-by-next-year/articleshow/90172838.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">INTERVIEW: You will be able to own Bajaj-made Yulu bikes by next year</a>

Amazon is bringing us to our knees, we're broke: Future Retail tells Supreme Court

<keyword id="144015" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="kalanithi-maran" source="Orion">Kalanithi Maran</keyword> and <keyword id="169847" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="kal-airways" source="Orion">KAL Airways</keyword> informed the Supreme Court on Monday that <keyword id="6358032" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="spicejet" source="Orion">SpiceJet</keyword>'s offer of ₹600 crore towards full and final settlement of the share transfer dispute was not acceptable. Senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing KAL Airways, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana that it was not possible for his clients to consider the offer proposed by SpiceJet airlines. The bench, also comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli, inquired further whether none of the two offers proposed by SpiceJet was acceptable. Singh replied in the negative and added that as per the arbitral award SpiceJet has to pay them ₹920 crore. Singh also submitted that he could take the court through the calculations as per the arbitral award from the pleadings itself in support of the arguments. He also submitted that the matter may be listed for arguments on the next date of hearing. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing SpiceJet airlines, urged the bench to hear the matter within 2 weeks. Singh was assisted by advocates from Karanjawala &amp; Co. After hearing arguments, the top court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on March 2. On February 10, the Supreme Court asked Kalanithi <keyword id="44006" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="maran" source="Orion">Maran</keyword>, the former promoter of SpiceJet, to consider the full and final settlement offer made by SpiceJet to end the dispute in a share transfer matter. In a statement SpiceJet, after the hearing in the top court, said: "SpiceJet has offered to pay ₹600 crore in cash in the share transfer case with its former promoter Kalanithi Maran and his firm KAL Airways for a full and final settlement of all disputes. Out of the principal amount of ₹578 crore awarded in arbitration, SpiceJet has already paid ₹308 crore in cash and deposited a bank guarantee of ₹270 crore." SpiceJet's counsel had proposed to pay the bank guarantee equivalent amount of ₹270 crore in cash and top it up with additional ₹22 crore aggregating the total pay-out to ₹600 crore as full and final settlement of all disputes between the parties. Maran and his firm, KAL Airways, had urged the top court to lift the stay on a Delhi High Court order asking the low-cost airline to deposit ₹243 crore as interest on the amount of ₹579 crore in the dispute. In November 2020, the top court stayed the high court order. Maran sought the stay to be lifted to secure the decreed amount -- refund amount awarded and interest -- from SpiceJet. Singh had argued that the high court had asked them to pay the decretal amount and against which SpiceJet had deposited only ₹270 crore as bank guarantee and now there is a winding up order passed against SpiceJet by the Madras High Court in another case being Credit Suisse AG Vs SpiceJet. He added that in such a change in circumstance, SpiceJet should be directed to pay and deposit ₹242 crore otherwise his client will have to run from pillar to post. Karanjawala &amp; Co. in a statement said the top court proposed two offers to Maran and KAL Airways that SpiceJet will give ₹300 crore towards full and final settlement of the dispute and the matter finally gets settled and no further litigation. Second, out of the bank guarantee of ₹270 crore deposited with HC, SpiceJet will give ₹100 crore for now and the order will be passed by the top court to hear petitions, which are pending before the high court expeditiously. The top court asked Singh to discuss the settlement with his client. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/sbi-and-icici-bank-lost-over-10000-crore-to-abg-shipyard-bank-fraud/articleshow/89559899.cms">SBI and ICICI Bank investors pay the price for the nearly ₹10,000 crore lost to the biggest bank fraud ever in India</a>

Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways reject SpiceJet's ₹600 crore settlement offer

The Centre on Tuesday informed the Supreme Court that the special committee constituted to examine restoration of 4G services in <keyword id="17605" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Jammu-and-kashmir">Jammu and Kashmir</keyword> has agreed to provide the high speed Internet access on a trial basis in limited areas. Attorney General K.K. Venugopal appearing for the Centre before a bench headed by Justice N.V. Ramana said that restrictions on Internet will be lifted on trial basis at certain geographical locations. The Centre informed the court that the relaxation from August 16, in one district each of Jammu and Kashmir division will be assessed after two months. The government also said that blanket restoration of 4G in the UT would not be possible due to threats to security. The apex court remarked "this is a fairly a good start", and commended the Centre's decision. The bench also observed that it hoped the situation would improve and the access could later be expanded. The Centre submitted that the special committee held its meeting on August 10, and explored multiple options in the backdrop of security situation in the union territory. They recommended opening up of 4G in specified areas of low intensity terrorist activities, not on international border even in the trial basis. Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the petitioner NGO, said: "Today is a good and a step forward at least some limited restoration has been made." Justice Ramana then closed the contempt case following the Centre's submission. The bench had given two weeks time to the Centre to file a reply on the intervention application. The contempt petition was filed by the NGO alleging that the Centre has not formed a special committee to review Internet restrictions in the UT despite the apex court's order. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/defense/news/tcs-tech-mahindra-hcl-tech-and-wipro-could-gain-from/articleshow/77478306.cms">India's armed forces are potential clients for TCS, Tech Mahindra, HCL Tech and the likes</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/icici-bank-sets-floor-price-for-qip-at-351-36-per-share-to-decide-on-allotment-on-august-14/articleshow/77464319.cms">ICICI Bank's share price jumps over 2% after it set floor price for QIP at ₹351.36 per share</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/markets/news/bank-of-baroda-opens-2-lower-after-reporting-864-crore-loss-on-higher-provisions/articleshow/77476538.cms">Bank of Baroda opens 2% lower after reporting ₹864 crore loss on higher provisions</a>

You Searched For "NV Ramana" and got 9 results

From the internet shutdowns in Jammu and Kashmir to the 2012 Delhi gang rape and murder case — these are some of the orders and stated positions of the next Chief Justice of India NV Ramana

Prabhjote Gill

Supreme Court asks Amazon, Flipkart to volunteer for CCI probe

IANS

Supreme Court likely to begin physical hearing in some courts from next week

IANS

SC to hear SEBI's review petition against RIL on Oct 12

IANS

Supreme Court agrees to hear Centre's plea on EWS quota for NEET-PG admissions

IANS

Delhi government says it is ready to take steps like order complete lockdown to control air pollution

IANS

Amazon is bringing us to our knees, we're broke: Future Retail tells Supreme Court

IANS

Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways reject SpiceJet's ₹600 crore settlement offer

IANS

4G to return to Jammu and Kashmir on a trial basis after over a year — Supreme Court calls it 'fairly good start'

IANS

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides