Sun TV Network Defends Promoter Kalanithi, Says All Legal Obligations Met
PTI
Last Updated:
Sun TV Network in a regulatory filing says the agreements between the two brothers had been "duly vetted" by "intermediaries" concerned before the company's public issue.
A day after reports emerged of former Union minister Dayanidhi Maran accusing his brother of 'fraudulent practices" and 'misgovernance", the elder sibling Kalanithi-run Sun TV on Friday said the division between the promoter family done 22 years back was in compliance with all legal obligations.
Defending its promoter Kalanithi, Sun TV Network in a regulatory filing said the agreements between the two brothers had been 'duly vetted" by 'intermediaries" concerned before the company's public issue.
According to reports, Dayanidhi has sent a legal notice to his brother and several others, accusing them of 'fraudulent practices" and 'misgovernance" in taking control of Sun TV after their father Murasoli Maran's death in 2003.
Dayanidhi, who is also a Lok Sabha member from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), has sought to restore the company's shareholding structure to its pre-September 2003 status.
The board of Sun TV Network is led by Kalanithi as Executive Director and Chairperson. His daughter Kavya Kalanithi Maran is also on the south-based broadcaster board.
Kalanithi, as a promoter, owns 75 per cent shareholding in Sun TV Network.
On Friday, Sun TV Network, in its regulatory filing said, 'The alleged matter dates back to 22 years when the company was a closely held private limited company." Defending the promoter, it further stated, 'Statements allegedly made in the articles are incorrect, misleading, speculating, defamatory and not supported by facts or law".
'We wish to inform that all acts have been done in accordance with legal obligations and the same had been duly vetted by concerned intermediaries before the public issue of the company," it said.
Moreover, Sun TV Network also said the media reports claiming a rift between the promoter Maran brothers 'does not have any bearing on the business of the company or its day-to-day functioning".
Sun TV Network also clarified that it is a 'family matter of the promoter" and is 'purely personal in nature".
Besides Kalanithi, financial institutions, including mutual funds and insurance companies, own 10.46 per cent of the shareholding of Sun TV and 6.87 per cent by the foreign portfolio investors.
Chennai-based Sun TV Network is among India's leading media conglomerates, having 37 television channels in seven languages, with a reach of more than 140 million households in India.
Besides, it also owns Sun Direct, a DTH (direct-to-home) platform and operates 69 FM radio stations under the brand names — Suryan FM, RED FM and Magic FM. It also operates three daily newspapers and six magazines.
In addition, Sun TV Network owns the Sunrisers Hyderabad franchise of the Indian Premier League and Sunrisers Eastern Cape of Cricket South Africa's T20 League.
For the 2024-25 financial year, the network's total consolidated income was Rs 4,712.60 crore, down 1.55 per cent. Its profit after tax was down 11.53 per cent to Rs 1,703.64 crore, against Rs 1,925.80 crore a year earlier.
First Published:
June 20, 2025, 14:30 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Enough nuke submarines to control 2 deployed by Trump, says Russian lawmaker
Moscow, Aug 1 (PTI) There are enough Russian nuclear submarines in the high seas to tackle two American subs dispatched by US President Donald Trump to counter Russia, a member of the Russian Parliament Duma has said. 'The number of Russian nuclear submarines in the world's oceans is significantly higher than the American ones, and the subs that US President Donald Trump ordered to be redirected to the appropriate regions have long been under their control. So no response from the Russian Federation to the American leader's statement about the submarines is required," a senior Russian lawmaker, Viktor Vodolatsky, was quoted as saying by TASS. Earlier on Friday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social post that he had ordered the redeployment of US submarines 'to appropriate regions" allegedly over 'extremely provocative statements" by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is also the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council. 'Let the two US subs sail, they have been in the crosshairs for a long time now," the Russian lawmaker said. 'A fundamental agreement that must be concluded between Russia and America so that the whole world calms down and stops talking about the beginning of World War III," he added. Meanwhile, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs magazine, Fyodor Lukyanov, said that Trump's nuclear submarine statement should not be taken seriously for now. Following the American leader's statements, the Moscow Exchange index plummeted 2,709.26 points (0.99%) by 08:01 pm Moscow time (10:31 pm IST) on Friday. Earlier, responding to a media question over US State Department Secretary Marco Rubio's recent interview with Fox News, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Russia agrees with the US administration that a direct military confrontation between Moscow and Washington must not happen. 'While Europeans are hysterically pushing for Ukraine's integration into NATO and preparing for potential conflict with Russia, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently reaffirmed a responsible stance, explicitly stating that a direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia must be avoided. We wholeheartedly concur with this position. Such shared understanding has been facilitated through constructive Russian-American dialogue," Lavrov said. PTI VS AMJ AMJ view comments First Published: August 02, 2025, 03:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
India rejects UK report alleging ‘transnational repression'
India Friday categorically rejected as 'baseless' a British parliamentary report that named it among countries engaged in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said the allegations stemmed from 'unverified' and 'dubious sources' predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals. 'We have seen the references to India in the report and categorically reject these baseless allegations,' said MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal. 'These claims stem from unverified and dubious sources, predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals with a clear, documented history of anti-India hostility,' he said. Jaiswal said the 'deliberate reliance on discredited sources calls into question the credibility of the report itself'. The report made by the British Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights listed India along with China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Bahrain, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates as countries allegedly engaging in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The report titled 'Transnational repression in the UK' was made public on July 30. Some of the details related to India cited in the report were provided by Sikhs for Justice, a pro-Khalistan organisation banned in India under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and other UK-based Sikh groups.
