Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], May 18 (ANI): AG Perarivalan, a convict serving life imprisonment in the case concerning the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, on Wednesday thanked Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin for "continued support" for his release.

Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], May 18 (ANI): Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin on Wednesday welcomed the release of AG Perarivalan, a convict serving life imprisonment in the case concerning assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

New Delhi Dec 30 PTI Observing that a child should not be made to suffer due to a dispute between a husband and wife the Supreme Court has asked an Army officer to look after the maintenance of his 13-year-old son till he attains the age of majorityWhile dissolving the officers marriage a bench comprising Justices M R Shah and A S Bopanna directed him to pay Rs 50000 as maintenance to the wifeConsidering the fact that both the appellant-wife and the respondent-husband are not staying together since May 2011 and therefore it can be said that there is irretrievable breakdown of marriage between them It is also reported that the husband has already re-married Therefore no useful purpose shall be served to further enter into the merits of the findings recorded by the courts below on cruelty and desertion by the appellant-wife the bench said In view of facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution the decree passed by the Family Court is not required to be interfered with on account of irretrievable breakdown of marriage the apex court saidHowever at the same time the husband cannot be absolved from his liability and responsibility to maintain his son till he attains the age of majority Whatever be the dispute between the husband and the wife a child should not be made to suffer The liability and responsibility of the father to maintain the child continues till the childson attains the age of majority the bench saidThe top court noted that the mother is not earning anything and therefore a reasonablesufficient amount is required for the maintenance of her son including his education etc which shall have to be paid by the husbandIn view of the above and for the reasons stated above the present appeal stands disposed of by confirming the decree of divorcedissolution of the marriage between the appellant-wife and the husband However the husband is directed to pay Rs 50000 per month with effect from December 2019 to the wife towards the maintenance of son it said in a recent orderThe marriage between the Army officer and his wife was solemnised on November 16 2005 The wife had filed a number of complaints against the husband before Army authorities including those pertaining to alleged extra-marital affairs of the respondent-husband An enquiry was initiated by the Army authorities against the officer in which he was exoneratedThe Army officer filed a case against the wife before the Family Court Jaipur in 2014 seeking a decree of divorce and dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife The Family Court passed a decree for dissolution of marriage between the appellant and the respondent on grounds of cruelty and desertion by the wife PTI PKS DV DV

New Delhi Sep 25 PTI The Supreme Court has said that the relaxation granted on the limitation period for filing court cases in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic would come to an end on October 2 A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana ordered that period from March 15 last year till October 2 this year shall stand excluded from computing the period of limitation Also in cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between March 15 2020 till October 2 2021 all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from October 3 2021 or the balance period originally left whichever is longer Earlier the apex court had on March 23 last year invoked its plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to extend the limitation period indefinitely for appeals from courts or tribunals on account of the pandemic with effect from March 15 2020 On March 8 this year the top court had noted that the country is returning to normalcy and had decided to end the extension of the limitation period which was granted in March 2020 to the litigants due to the pandemic However the court had on April 27 took note of the onset of the second COVID-19 wave and again relaxed the statutory period for filing petitions including the election petitions under the Representation of the People Act 1951 In its September 23 order passed in the suo motu matter cognisance for extension of limitation the apex court noted In spite of all the uncertainties about another wave of the deadly COVID-19 virus it is imminent that the order dated March 8 2021 is restored as the situation is near normal In computing the period of limitation for any suit appeal application or proceeding the period from March 15 2020 till October 2 2021 shall stand excluded Consequently the balance period of limitation remaining as on March 15 2021 if any shall become available with effect from October 3 2021 said the bench also comprising justices L Nageswara Rao and Surya Kant The bench noted that it had heard submissions of Attorney General K K Venugopal senior advocate Vikas Singh who was appearing for the Election Commission of India counsel appearing for the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association and other lawyers on the issue There is consensus that there is no requirement for the continuance of the initial order passed by this court on March 23 2020 and relaxation of the period of limitation need not be continued any further the court said It said the order was passed on March 23 last year in view of the extraordinary health crisis On March 8 2021 the order dated March 23 2020 was brought to an end permitting relaxation of the period of limitation between March 15 2020 and March 14 2021 While doing so it was made clear that the period of limitation would start from March 15 2021 it said The bench said as the March 8 this year order was only a one-time measure in view of the pandemic it is not inclined to modify the conditions contained in that order In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between March 15 2020 till October 2 2021 notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from October 3 2021 In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining with effect from October 3 2021 is greater than 90 days that longer period shall apply it said The apex court said the period from March 15 last year till October 2 2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act the Commercial Courts Act the Negotiable Instruments Act and any other laws which prescribe period of limitation The Government of India shall amend the guidelines for containment zones to state Regulated movement will be allowed for medical emergencies provision of essential goods and services and other necessary functions such as time-bound applications including for legal purposes and educational and job-related requirements the bench said in its order While hearing the matter on September 23 the bench had taken note of the improved pandemic situation and observed that it will recall its April 27 order by which it had extended the operation of an earlier direction on limitation period It had observed that the suo motu extension of the limitation period will be withdrawn and after that the usual limitation period of 90 days for filing cases in courts will come into effect once again During the hearing the Attorney General had suggested that the March 8 2021 order of the apex court which had recalled the last years direction extending the limitation period indefinitely may be restored PTI ABA ABA RT RT