The Secretary-General presented the 2015 OECD Economic Survey of Iceland and held meetings with the President of Iceland, the Prime Minster and several other ministers. Mr. Gurría also attended meetings with business and unions, and the Parliament’s Economic and Trade Affairs Committee.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Reykjavik on 15-16 September 2019 to present the 2019 OECD Economic Survey of Iceland, alongside Mr. Bjarni Benediktsson, Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs, and Ms. Lilja Alfredsdottir, Minister of Education, Science and Culture of Iceland.

The Secretary-General of the OECD, Mr. Angel Gurría, will be in Rome on Friday 31 January 2020 to present the OECD Review of Italian Capital Markets “Creating Growth Opportunities for Italian Companies and Savers”.

Mr. Gurría presented the 2015 OECD Economic Survey of Luxembourg and met with Prime Minister Xavier Bettel.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Luxembourg on 10 July 2019, on an Official Visit. He will present the OECD 2019 Economic Survey of Luxembourg alongside Mr. Pierre Gramegna, Minister of Finance and Ms. Sam Tanson, Minister of Housing.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Brasilia on 21st March 2018 to attend the World Water Forum.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Prague on 16 July 2018 on an official visit. He will present the 2018 OECD Economic Survey and the Environmental Performance Review of the Czech Republic.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Mexico on 2-3 May 2019 to present the 2019 OECD Economic Survey of Mexico.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Metz on 6 May 2019 to attend the G7 Environment Ministerial. He will deliver remarks to present the OECD report Biodiversity: Finance and the Economic and Business Case for Action.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Riga on 29 May 2019 to present the 2019 OECD Economic Survey of Latvia and the 2019 OECD Environmental Performance Review of Latvia, alongside Messrs. Ralfs Nemiro, Minister of Economics of Latvia and Juris Pūce, Minister for Environmental Protection and Regional Development of Latvia.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Madrid on 2nd December 2019 to attend the official opening of the UN Climate Change Conference (COP25).

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Berlin on 13 and 14 May 2014 to attend the annual meeting that Chancellor Angela Merkel holds with the heads of some leading International Organisations.

Mr. Angel Gurría was in Berlin at the invitation of Mrs. Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany. The Secretary-General also attended the G7 Stakeholder Conference and deliver remarks at a panel on promoting decent work worldwide through sustainable supply chains

Mr. Gurría delivered a keynote speech at a conference on policy options for more investment in Germany and Europe. He also met Mr. Sigmar Gabriel, Vice Chancellor of Germany, as well as other high-level German officials and Kristalina Georgieva, EU-Vice President and Commissioner for Budget and Staff.

The Secretary-General was in Berlin to present the 2015 OECD Skills Outlook. He also attended a number of meetings including the International Transport Forum annual summit in Leipzig and the G7 finance summit in Dresden.

At the invitation of Angela Merkel, Federal Chancellor of Germany, Secretary-General Gurría participated in working sessions on the Development Agenda alongside G7 partners, African Leaders and Heads of IGOs.

The Secretary-General delivered a speech at the G7 Forum for Dialogue with Women dinner on “Promoting gender equality in the G7 and beyond: education, employment and entrepreneurship”.

The Secretary-General attended a meeting of the Heads of international organisations and presented the 2016 OECD Economic Survey of Germany.

The Secretary-General was in Baden-Baden on 17-18 March 2017 to attend the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors meeting. While in Baden-Baden, he also presented the OECD Going for Growth report, hold bilateral meetings and attend the G20 High-Level Symposium: Global Economic Governance in a Multipolar World.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, was in Berlin on 30 November 2017 to attend the G20 Global Forum on Steel Excess Capacity (GFSEC) Ministerial Meeting.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Berlin on 11-12 June 2018 to attend a meeting with Chancellor Merkel and Heads of International Organisations. While in Berlin, the Secretary-General will also present the 2018 OECD Economic Survey of Germany.

Die Resistenzraten für acht Antibiotikum-Bakterium Kombinationen sind in Deutschland zwischen 2005 und 2015 von 12% auf 10% gesunken, könnte aber bis zum Jahr 2030 wieder auf 13% ansteigen, falls die Trends im Antibiotika-Konsum, sowie beim Bevölkerungs- und Wirtschaftswachstum anhalten. Der Resistenzraten in Deutschland lagen im Jahr 2015 unter dem OECD-Durchschnitt (17%).

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Berlin on 25 April 2019 to present THE FUTURE OF WORK - the OECD 2019 Employment Outlook.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Berlin on 1-2 October 2019 to attend a meeting with Chancellor Merkel and Heads of International Organisations. While in Berlin, the Secretary-General will hold bilateral meetings with Chancellor Merkel and other high level officials.

The Secretary-General of the OECD, Mr. Angel Gurría, will be in Munich from 13 to 14 February 2020 to attend the The Munich Cyber Security Conference (MCSC) and The Munich Security Conference (MSC).

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, will be in Brussels on 6 May 2019 to present the OECD publication “The European Union: a People-Centred Agenda - An International Perspective”.

Sector-wide Schemata PMR 2018

Economy-wide Schemata 2018 PMR Economy-wide

Economy wide PMR Indicators (July 2019)

Sectoral PMR Indicators (July 2019)

Sectoral PMR 2018 Database

OECD PMR database July 2019 - Economy wide

OECD World Bank Economy wide PMR Indicators

The Secretary-General spoke at the Anti-Corruption Summit, hosted by Prime Minister David Cameron. He also met with leaders attending the event and signed a memorandum of understanding with Italian National Anti-Corruption Authority.

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, was in Mexico from 6 to 9 January 2015 on an official visit, to present the OECD 2015 Economic Survey of Mexico alongside Mr. Luis Videgaray, Minister of Finance of Mexico.

1. Mother’s Day 2020: Sara Ali Khan epic pic with mom Amrita Singh, ‘maa ki maa’ Rukhsana Sultana captures...  Hindustan Times
2. A Glimpse Of Kareena Kapoor's "Saturday Mood" With Saif Ali Khan  NDTV
3. Kareena Kapoor Khan shares her ‘Saturday Mood’ with a classy throwback pic of her & Saif Ali Khan from Morocco  PINKVILLA
4. Kareena Kapoor Khan's Throwback Picture With Hubby, Saif Ali Khan Is A Perfect Dose Of Weekend Vibes  BollywoodShaadis.com
5. When Aishwarya Rai Bachchan was asked to pick between Kareena Kapoor Khan & Rani Mukerji; Here’s what she said  PINKVILLA
6. View Full coverage on Google News

Mr, Saniay Govind Dhande & Ors. .. Respondents BERPORE:

HON BLE MR.FUSTICE SHIVA BIRTI SINGH, CHAIRPERSON For Petitioner (in C.A. No.l of 2014) =: Mr, Thyagrajan, Advocate Ms. Akanksha Banerjee, Advocate For Petitioner (in C.A. No.4 of 2014) : Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate For Respondents > Mr. Arpun Natrajan, Advocate QRDER By S.K. Singh, Chairperson -- At the outset, it ig recorded that learned counsel for Vodafone Cellular Ltd, appellant in Cyber Appeal No.1 of 2014 has informed that the name of the above corporate entity now stands changed to Vodafone Idea Lid. He prays that this change may be recorded and the changed name should appear in the judgment. This prayer has not been opposed by the learned counsel for the other side and hence the change in the name of Vodatone Cellular Ltd. to that of Vodafone Idea Lid. is recorded and the cause title of this judgment and order is accordingly modified so as to teflect the name of Vodafone Idea Lid. Cyber Appeal No.1 of 2014 has been taken as the lead matter. The appellant in the other appeal (Cyber Appeal No.4 of 2014) Le. ICICT Bank Lid. is one of the respondents in Cyber Appeal No.1 of 2014,

2. The Appellate Tribunal at the relevant time could not take up the appeals because of vacancies in its composition and therefore, the appellant approached the Hon'ble High Court of Hyderabad through a writ petition bearing WP No.22474/2014 to challenge the impugned Tariff Order dated 24.02.2014 and also to seek its suspension/stay. The High Court issued notices and by an order passed on 26.11.2014 it also directed the Registry to requisition/eall for the records of the present appeal. The Appellate Tribunal was also directed to send the records of this appeal which was accordingly sent within time. It may be noted that the High Court did not transfer the appeal to itself but only requisitioned the records. When the Appellate Tribunal began to function, then in the presence of learned counsel for the appellant, vide order dated 26.11.2015, it held that since the Hon'ble High Court has decided to examine the correctness and validity of the impugned Tariff Order challenged in the present appeal, the appeal has been rendered mfructuous.

2. Brief facts and allegations in the present case are summarised as under:

a. The Informants i.e., Mr. Meet Shah and Mr. Anand Ranpara are individuals residing in Ahmedabad and Rajkot, respectively.

b. OP-1 is the Ministry of Railways, which controls Indian Railways, a departmental undertaking of the Government of India which is administered by the Railway Board. The Ministry of Railways through Railway Board also owns and administratively controls a large number of Public Sector Undertakings including IRCTC.

c. OP-2, IRCTC is a public sector enterprise incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is stated to be an extended arm of Indian Railways. OP-2 is, inter-alia, engaged in online ticketing operations of Indian Railways.

2. As stated in the information, the Informant is a pharmaceutical wholesaler who had placed an order for purchase of drugs from USV on 31.07.2019. Kundan vide its letter dated 06.08.2019, confirmed receipt of the said order of the Informant along with documents and demand draft.

3. The Informant alleged that USV imposed the following unfair conditions on the Informant:

 Collection of goods from Pune C&F agent (Kundan), which is 360 km away from the Informant's location.  The Informant is not entitled to return any product purchased from USV for any reason whatsoever including those on account of expiry or damage.  Advance payment to be paid every time.  The Informant cannot purchase the products of USV from any other C&F agent.

2. Anti TB Department Mr. K. S. Sachdeva, DDG, Room No. 243-A/523 'C' Wing, Nirman Bhawan Opposite Party No. 2 New Delhi

3. RITES India Ltd.

MSM Division, RITES Bhawan-II, 4th Floor, Plot No. 144, Sector-44, Gurgaon-122003 Opposite Party No. 3 Haryana CORAM Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta Chairperson Ms. Sangeeta Verma Member Mr. Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi Member Case No. 02 of 2020 1 Order under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002

1. The Information in the present case has been filed by Mr. Ambalal V. Patel (hereinafter, the 'Informant') under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter, the "Act") against Central Medical Service Society (hereinafter, the 'CMSS/ Opposite Party No. 1 / OP-1'), Anti TB Department (hereinafter, the 'Opposite Party No. 2 / OP-2') and RITES India Ltd (hereinafter, the 'Opposite Party No. 3 / OP-3'), alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act. Hereinafter, OP-1, OP-2 and OP-3 are collectively referred to as 'Opposite Parties / OPs'.

2. The Informant has filed the information for Teleclub (Alberta Limited), Canada in the capacity of its CEO. It is submitted by the Informant that Teleclub is one of the international telecom carriers in Canada.

3. As per publically available information, OP-1 is an Indian subsidiary of Britain based Vodafone Group PLC, which started Indian operations in 2007 with the acquisition of controlling interest in Hutch Essar. In 2018, Vodafone acquired Idea Cellular and became the largest telecom service provider in India. Likewise, OP-2 and OP-3 are also major telecom service providers operating in India. Further, as per publicly available information, OP-4 is the largest Information and Communications Technology ("ICT") service provider, systems integrator and all-in-one network solutions company operating in India, which has partnered with major network operators to deliver global network solutions.

----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 489/2020 Ramdayal@r.d. S/o Ramkaran

----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan

This Court further finds that on 17th April, 2020, this Court had also made efforts to contact to the lawyer but he did not respond.

Accordingly, this Court is left with no other option except to adjourn this case.

This Court also finds that if learned counsel has moved an application for listing of the bail application, he is expected to be available on either mode of communication with him.

A five-storied building could not have been constructed in an unauthorised manner within a couple of days. It must have taken months for the same to be constructed. The Municipal authorities, as also the local police station, cannot feign ignorance of the building having coming up in their presence upto the fifth floor in an unauthorised manner.

In such circumstances, the said Mr. Joysurja Mukherjee, as we are now told is posted as Officer-in-Charge, Tiljala Police Station, should also be present in Court on 20th March, 2020 to assist this Court and explain how could such an unauthorised structure came up upto the fifth floor.

(ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.) (SUBRATA TALUKDAR, J.) K. Banerjee A.R. [C.R.]

2

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that although only one of the companies was alleged to have committed default, the DIN of the petitioners was deactivated in respect of the other companies, in which they were directors, as well, which was de hors the law.

4. Moreover, even in respect of the defaulting company, the DIN of the petitioners could not be deactivated without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners on the allegations made against them in respect of each company.

5. The disqualification of the company‐in‐question took place in the year 2014, that is, prior to the 2018 Amendment of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2013 Act") and as such, the provisions of the 2018 Amendment would not be applicable thereto.

These two appeals against the decision of the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) rendered on 16th July, 2008 require adjudication on the question as to whether 1 “car matting” would come within Chapter 57 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 under the heading “Carpets and Other Textile Floor Coverings” or they would be classified under Chapter 87 thereof, which relates to “Vehicles other than Railway or Tramway Rolling-Stock and Parts and Accessories Thereof”. The appeals are against a common decision and we shall also deal with both these appeals together in this judgment. The respondent-assessee want their goods to be placed under Chapter heading 5703.90. We shall refer to the specific entries against this item later in the judgment. The respondent, at the material point of time were engaged in the business of manufacture of textile floor coverings and car matting. The subject-goods have been referred to interchangeably by the revenue also as car mattings and car carpets. The respondent, at the material time, were clearing the goods declaring them to be goods against Heading No.570390.90. Effective rate of excise duty on goods under that entry was 8% and education cess at the applicable rate for the subject period. We find this rate of duty, 2 inter-alia, from the order of the Commissioner dealing with the first and the second show-cause notices. The rate of basic excise duty would have been 16% apart from education cess if these goods were classified against goods specified in heading no.8708.99.00. Altogether three show-cause-notices were issued against the respondent over clearance of goods under the said heading. These notices required them to answer as to why they should not be charged the differential rate of duty and interest. We would like to point out here that in the show-cause notices, the respective chapter sub-headings have been referred to as 8708.99.00 and 570390.90 and in the order of the Tribunal also, the sub-headings have been referred to as such. But the authorities themselves in certain places described the sub-headings in shorter numerical forms, as 5703.90 and 8708.00. We find these minor variations in the paper-book. But this variation of the sub- headings represented in numerical form is not of any significance so far as adjudication of these appeals are concerned. The respondent were also to answer as to why penalty should not be 3 imposed upon them in terms of Section 38A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Rules made thereunder. The first show-cause notice is dated 9th August, 2005 in regard to clearance of goods made during the period between 9 th July, 2004 and 31st March, 2005. They had cleared altogether 8,65,777 pieces of those items in different sizes in that period. The second show-cause notice was issued on 2 nd May, 2006 and related to clearance of 12,02,482 pieces of the same goods for the period between 1st April, 2005 and 31st January, 2006. The third show- cause notice is of 7th March, 2007 and the clearance involved 20,15,412 pieces from 1st February, 2006 to 31st January, 2007. For the period involved in the third show-cause notice, clearance was made by the respondent under Chapter sub-heading no.570500.19, which carried effective rate of duty @8%.

1. The Court proceedings have been conducted by means of creating a Virtual Court with the help of technology, so as to maintain distance between the staff, Advocates and the Presiding Judge.

2. By this Anticipatory Bail Application, Mr. Mridul Das seeks bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Ambari P.S. Case No. 393 of 2019, registered under Sections 120(B)/420/406/403/506 of the IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has not appeared.

4. The application has been pending since 27.11.2019, when an interim order granting anticipatory bail was passed in favour of the applicant. Under the circumstances, I find no Page No.# 2/3 justifiable reason to await appearance by the counsel for the applicant.

2. Summons in the present suit were issued on 24th October 2014 and vide order dated 3rd April 2018, following issues weresettled: -

i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a money decree against the defendant, if so for what amount? OPP ii. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest, if so at what rate and for what period? OPP iii. Relief.

3. Briefly stated, case of the plaintiff is that he is a duly registered Class- I contractor, under the name Bharat Construction Company, a CS(COMM) 719/2017 Page 1 of 18 proprietorship firm with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The plaintiff was awarded construction work of outfall drain from A-74, Phase-I, Naraina Industrial Area to DTC Nallah at Loha Mandi Naraina in Karol Bagh Zone vide work order No. EE-Project Karol Bagh/SYS/2011- 2012/14 dated 10th February 2012. The contractual amount of the work was Rs. 4,05,26,960 and the time for completion was of 6 months.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition, in short, are that the applicant got married with respondent No.1 as per Muslim rites and rituals. Respondent No.2 is father-in- law, applicant No.3 is mother-in-law , applicant No.4 is sister-in-law of the applicant. The applicant has been living in matrimonial hose along with all the respondents since marriage. Respondent No.1- husband of the applicant and respondent No.3-mother-in-law of the applicant are having joint title and possession of the questioned house (matrimonial house) where the applicant is living. While she was living in matrimonial house, she gave birth to a girl child, but, all the respondents wanted a male child, therefore, harassed her in so many occasions, beat her and did not allow her to go outside and when she got chance to go outside, she immediately filed a report against the respondents and 3 also filed an application under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 of the Domestic Violence Act and prayed for maintenance and restriction order not to interfere in the possession of the applicant in her matrimonial house. The applicant also filed an application under Section 23 of Domestic Violence Act for interim order.