Regulations
Foreign shareholding limit in Indian stock exchanges raised
The Union Cabinet on Wednesday approved a proposal to raise foreign shareholding limit in Indian stock exchanges from 5 to 15 per cent, an official statement said.
 
The decision, taken at a meeting of the cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, will increase shareholding limits for foreign stock exchanges, depositories, banks, insurance companies and commodity derivative exchanges.
 
"The cabinet has also approved the proposal to allow foreign portfolio investors to acquire shares through initial allotment, besides secondary market, in the stock exchanges," the statement said.
 
"The move will help in enhancing global competitiveness of Indian stock exchanges by accelerating, facilitating the adoption of latest technology and global best practices which will lead to overall growth and development of the Indian capital market," it said, adding that the approval was in pursuance of implementation of the union budget 2016-17 announcement made by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley regarding reforms in FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) policy in Indian stock exchanges.
 
The National Stock Exchange (NSE) welcomed the Union Cabinet's decision.
 
"NSE has always aligned itself with global best practices. Exchange believes that government's decision is in sync with the spirit of globalisation," said its Managing Director and Chief Executive Chitra Ramkrishna.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Kid Games: They Learn while Toying with Your Phone
Educational Games for Kids by Zodinplex is a great fun tool for kids that let your kids to learn while playing on your Smartphone. It has games and flash cards to learn numbers, alphabets, words, shapes, colours, weekdays, calendar and much more. Logic and sounds are all built-in to give a complete kid-friendly experience. Animal sounds, calendar, quiz and much more are bundled into a fun-way of learning—nowadays called edutainment. It is very simple to handle and will keep your kid busy for hours while she figures out each of the exercises. 
 
It helps in training for memory, improves pronunciations, enhances concepts and improves development. It is meant for pre-school kids to learn the tricks of the trade fast.
 
In the process, they will be adept at handling your Smartphone too!  You have been warned! Maybe, we will talk about kid-blocker apps, some other time.
 

User

This Judge Parted with His Pants... And Lost His Shirt
Around the turn of the century, a news report had carried a bizarre story. An American judge gave his trousers (pants) to a Chinese laundry for alteration. Cost $10.50. He then experienced what is a common occurrence; clothes lost at the laundry. Happens to everybody. 
 
In India, the usual practice is to compensate by paying half the cost of the missing garment. Judge Pearson was not to be so easily placated. He must have served in the navy, for he thought his pants were made of gold. He sued Ms Chung, the laundress, for $54 million. Nearly Rs362 crore, in today’s money.
 
The story was lost in memory when suddenly it hit the news. While no one in his right mind would institute such a suit, for half a suit, the dishonourable judge had argued with typical lawyerly ingenuity. There was a sign, he said, outside the laundry that stated, ‘SATISFACTION GUARANTEED’. And that, according to his judicial prudence, meant ‘complete satisfaction’. He quoted other signage, too.
 
To rub the salt in, Judge Pearson came up with some voodoo mathematics. He added, multiplied and exponentially increased the figure for damages. He included attorney’s fees for a case he was pursuing himself. Ms Chung, the Chinese laundress, countered with, “the ‘SATISFACTION GUARANTEED’ sign has greeted each arriving customer, (that) they actually intended only to operate in accordance with prevailing industry standards—and prevailing industry standards do not unconditionally (or even conditionally) include as a part of the purchase price a guarantee that the customer will be satisfied with all aspects of his or her transaction with the cleaners.” Battle had been joined.
 
Then, one day, Ms Chung claimed that “they have located the Plaintiff’s pants and offered them to Plaintiff,” and filed a $4,600 offer of judgement. ‘Chickenfeed’ said Judge Pearson. And on he went, until the vicious nature of the ‘Pant Suit’ inevitably led to disciplinary action against Judge Pearson. He lost his job and was put in the dock. 
 
You be the judge. 
 
The committee decided, as any reasonable man would. It first admonished Judge Pearson, “… in the Court’s view, has been delayed unnecessarily by Pearson’s disproportionate approach” and that “(Pearson) is acting in bad faith and with an intent to delay the proceedings.” Judge Pearson’s verbal gymnastics and weirdo interpretations had left a bitter taste in every mouth. 
 
It further observed, “We note, however, that (Pearson) was so unwavering in his obstinacy that he recklessly deprived himself of a settlement of at least $12,000”. Next, “… in the Committee’s view, (Pearson’s) litigation tactics went beyond aggressiveness and crossed the boundary into abusiveness,” and, “(I)n addition, at some points (Pearson’s) actions reflected a level of personal animus against the Chungs.” As we have said often, the ‘teach-him-a-lesson’ lawsuit will end disastrously. 
 
Fortunately for Judge Pearson, there was no indication of dishonesty, eliminating the chances of severe punishment. He wound up with a slap-on-the wrist 30-day sanction. 
 
What do we learn from this? That courts are not amphitheatres nor are advocates-paid gladiators. That lawyers must adhere to what others say about approaching courts. There need to be meritorious claims and contentions. “A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument…’
 
To give the devil his due, Judge Pearson had a good track-record but, at that point, was going through a marriage break-up. He needed $12, 000/- to pay his ex-wife’s attorney! 
 
And the Chungs have removed the signs. 

User

COMMENTS

Prakash Shiva

4 months ago

'Attara Cutchery' Karnataka High Court Building, faced similar problem which was resolved by the Supreme Court. Eminent Citizens of Bangalore had filed Writ petition in that regard.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)