Money Demonization means “Converting Black Money to White” !?

King of Black Money now Mr. White (alias Mr. Shekar Reddy) =    127 Kgs of Gold + 70 Crores of Newly printed 2000 Rs. Currency + 70 kgs of Gold wires .. 

Black money holders increasingly becoming Milky White. 
People losing faith on Money Demonetization! 

Money Demonitization !! Is it only for a common man !?

Why not Indian Government lay strict rules against Banks instead on a common man. 

Source from : http://www.andhrajyothy.com/artical?SID=343881

Advertisements

Avoid day to day problems arising during this Money Demonetization, If Indian Govt. would restrict to use Cash transactions.! This is the right time to make use of Card Swipe machines.(Debit/Credit) for every Indian.

fotolia_2273118_xs                       credit-card-swipe-machine-250x250

Why not Govt would restrict to use Cash transactions.!and make Swipe machines a mandatory move to use for Debit/Credit transactions in all small & big transactions.

*All debit/credit transactions made through Swipe machines will become 100% white.

 

Common Problems facing by middle & below middle class people:

  1. Transportation:  Say Example:Auto stands : Group them under one unit, let the charge be fixed by Govt and they assign the available auto-rickshaw based on the demand. Just like how we hire taxi in Airports through a centralized service.
  2. Fruits/Vegetables/Groceries: Anyways Government fixing rates on these, why not these transaction be done by swiping debit/credit cards. A simple though can avoid all these discrepancies.
  3. Daily Wages: If they are directly deposited to their account, instead of cash. Then people can use them without depending on any currency in hand.

narendra-modi-BJP

 

 

 

 

Sometimes a simple idea can change everyone’s life.

Jai Hind.

 

 

వేరే కాపురం పెడదామన్నా విడాకులివ్వొచ్చు

 

7brk-supreme

ఇంటర్నెట్‌డెస్క్‌:  వివాహమయ్యాక భర్తను అతని తల్లిదండ్రుల నుంచి దూరం చేయాలని చూసే భార్యకు విడాకులు ఇవ్వొచ్చని సుప్రీంకోర్టు స్పష్టం చేసింది. అయితే ఈ చట్టం హిందువులకు మాత్రమే వర్తిస్తుందని పేర్కొంది.

వివాహమయ్యాక భర్తతో మాత్రమే కలిసి ఉండాలని, సంపాదన తనకు మాత్రమే దక్కాలన్న స్వార్థంతో అతడిని తల్లిదండ్రుల నుంచి దూరం చేయకూడదని జస్టిస్‌ అనిల్‌ ఆర్‌.దవే, జస్టిస్‌ ఎల్‌.నాగేశ్వరరావులతో కూడిన ధర్మాసనం తీర్పు వెలువరించింది. వివాహమయ్యాక వేరే కాపురం పెట్టాలన్న ఆలోచన భారతీయ సంప్రదాయానికి విరుద్ధమని కోర్టు పేర్కొంది.

 

‘‘కుటుంబాన్ని పోషిస్తున్న వ్యక్తికి వివాహమయ్యాక.. భార్య వేరే కాపురం పెట్టాలనుకోవడం చాలా తప్పు. తల్లిదండ్రులు తమ పిల్లలను పెంచి పెద్దచేసి చదివించినప్పుడు… వివాహమయ్యాక కన్నవారిని పోషించడం వారి బాధ్యత. వృద్ధాప్యంలో వారి వద్ద డబ్బు ఉన్నా లేకపోయినా చూసుకోవాల్సిన బాధ్యత కుమారుడిపైనే ఉంటుంది’’ అని జస్టిస్‌ దవే తన తీర్పులో పేర్కొన్నారు.

Source: http://www.eenadu.net/homeinner.aspx?category=general&item=break71

Supreme Court: Forcing the husband to leave his parents, who are dependent on his income, amounts to cruelty.(in India)

7brk-supreme

Supreme Court: Dealing with the case where the husband had sought divorce from his wife on the ground that she was forcing him to leave his parents as he was proving them financial support, the Court said that in a Hindu society, it is a pious obligation of the son to maintain the parents. If a wife makes an attempt to deviate from the normal practice and normal custom of the society, she must have some justifiable reason and hence, the Karnataka High Court erred in holding that mere monetary consideration was a justifiable reason to separate the husband from his parents.

The bench of A.R. Dave and L. Nageswara Rao, JJ added that in Stating that no son would like to be separated from his old parents and other family members, who are also dependent upon his income, the Court said that the persistent effort of the wife to constrain the husband to be separated from the family would be torturous for the husband and will constitute as an act of ‘cruelty’.

The husband had also contended that the wife had levelled serious allegations against him regarding his character and about his extra-marital relationship with the maid named ‘Kamla’. However, it was found that no maid named Kamla worked in their house. Hence, the Court said that except for the baseless and reckless allegations, there is not even the slightest evidence that would suggest that there was something like an affair of the husband with the maid named by the wife. On this the Court said that to suffer an allegation pertaining to one’s character of having an extra-marital affair is quite torturous for any person – be it a husband or a wife and amounts to mental cruelty. [Narendra v. K. Meena, CIVIL APPEAL NO.3253 OF 2008, decided on 06.10.2016]

Source :  http://www.eenadu.net/homeinner.aspx?category=general&item=break71