Navy should apologise and pay Rs 25L compensation to families of missing fishermen: Pramod Madhwaraj
Udupi: Former fisheries minister Pramod Madhawraj on Saturday once again came down hard on Indian Navy for allegedly killing the seven fishermen onboard Suvarna Tribhuja fishing boat that went missing on December 15 last year.
The JD(S)-Congress Candidate from Udupi-Chikmagalur constituency has been constantly claiming that Indian Navy ship INS Cochin collided with the fishing boat killing all seven fishermen onboard.
Madhawraj on Saturday asserted that the Navy should apologise to the families of fishermen for hiding the truth from them for over four months and that the Navy should pay immediate compensation of Rs. 25 Lakhs to the families of fishermen.
He added that he has also written to the President of India, Prime Minister, Chief Ministers of Karnataka and Maharashtra and Defence Minister in this regard.
“If they confess to accept their crime within time, I will approach Supreme Court to get justice for the poor fishermen. And if necessary I will also file case against Defence Minister Nirmala Sitaraman” Madhawraj said.
“The navy wouldn't have information about the incident that happened on the night of Dec 15-16. But, they should have admitted the incident after a case was filed at Udupi and it caught headlines of national media. But they remained silent. Due to the Lok Sabha Elections the BJP leaders played politics over the incident and acted like helping the families by meeting them and assuring help to gain political mileage in the election” Madhawraj told reporters while addressing press conference in Udupi.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
B'luru woman files civil suit seeking ₹62 lakhs after alleged harassment by housing society members
Bengaluru: A 22-year-old woman in Bengaluru has made headlines after launching legal action against members of her housing society. She claimed trespassing, harassment, and intimidation at a private meeting at her apartment.
The incident was posted by the woman in detail in a series of posts on Reddit. It reportedly took place on a Saturday night when five of her friends visited her home. She stated that the gathering was quiet, with no music or party, and involved only cooking and conversation.
According to her account, a society member knocked on her door and objected to what he assumed was a gathering of tenants, allegedly stating that “bachelors are not allowed.” The woman claimed that she told him that she was the owner of the flat before closing the door. Soon after, four to five men entered her living room without permission, accusing her and her friends of consuming alcohol and drugs, and demanding that she leave the flat by the next day.
ALSO READ: Woman arrested for theft, stolen gold articles worth Rs 32 lakh seized
The woman said her friends intervened and forced the men out of the house. When members of the society contacted the police, the situation escalated. She claimed that the police requested her to prove ownership of the property, which she refused, claiming there was no disturbance and that the men had no right to enter her home. She also stated that CCTV cameras put in her living room captured the entire episode.
In a subsequent post, the woman said she served legal notices to the housing society and the individuals involved, accusing them of trespass, harassment and assault. She claimed the CCTV footage was shown to the builder and the society chairman, following which the accused board members were removed from their positions and fined ₹20,000 each.
She further stated that she had filed a civil suit seeking ₹62 lakh in compensation. She also demanded a permanent injunction restraining the accused from contacting her in the future. According to her lawyer, while full compensation may be unlikely, even partial damages would be significant.
The posts quickly went viral and received strong reactions on social media. Many users praised her decision to pursue legal remedies. Few others asserted that housing society members had no authority to enter a resident’s home without consent.
