Cochin airport 1st in India to use solar power for its grid

Kathmandu, Jul 14: After staking claim to Indian territories of Lipulekh-Kalapani in  a new controversial map,  Nepal Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli on Monday claimed that Ayodhya, the birthplace of Lord Rama, is in Nepal and Lord Rama was Nepali.

“Although real Ayodhya lies at Thori, city in the west of Birgunj, India has claimed that Lord Rama was born there. Due to these continuous claims, even we have believed that deity Sita got married to Prince Rama of India. However, in reality, Ayodhya is a village lying west of Birgunj,” Oli claimed at an event organised at Prime Minister's residence in Kathmandu.

The Prime Minister also blamed India of cultural encroachment by “creating a fake Ayodhya.”

“Balmiki Ashram is in Nepal and the holy place where King Dashrath had executed the rites to get the son is in Ridi. Dashrath’s son Ram was not an Indian and Ayodhya is also in Nepal,” he claimed.

In an attempt to save self from criticism, Oli questioned how Lord Rama could come to Janakpur to marry Sita when there were "no means" of communication. He further said that it to be impossible for Lord Rama to come to Janakpur from present Ayodhya that lies in India.

“Janakpur lies here and Ayodhya there and there is talk of marriage. There was neither telephone nor mobile then how could he know about Janakpur,” Oli said.

The Shopping Centres Association of India (SCAI) on Monday said the sector has lost over Rs 90,000 crore in the last two months, owing to the lockdown, and market players need much more than the repo rate cut and the loan moratorium extended by the RBI.

In a statement, the industry body said that the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) relief measures are not adequate to support the liquidity needs of the industry.

According to the SCAI, there is a common misconception that the shopping centres' industry is centred around metros and large cities with investments only from large developers, private equity players and foreign investors.

"However, the fact is that most malls are part of the SMEs or standalone developers. i.e. more than 550 are single owned by standalone developers out of the 650-odd organised shopping centres across the country and there are 1,000+ small centres in smaller cities," it said.

Amitabh Taneja, Chairman of SCAI said: "The organised retail industry is in distress and has not earned anything since the lockdown and their survival is at stake. While the extension of the loan moratorium talks about some relief on repayment but won't help the industry in liquidity."

He said that a long term beneficial plan from the government is much required to revive the sector.

"Being the most safe, accountable, and controlled environment, unfortunately, malls have not been permitted to open which will lead to job losses and might even shut shops for a lot of mall developers," Taneja said.

In its representations to the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India, the association has also pointed out that, in absence of financial package and stimulus from the RBI, over 500 shopping centres may go bankrupt, that may lead to the banking industry staring at NPAs of Rs 25,000 crore.

The industry body has put forward its recommendations and requests to the government. It had sought moratorium till March 2021 at the least in terms of repayment of bank loans, interest, EMI and so on, without levy of any penalties or penal interest.

It has also sought a one-time loan restructuring with lower rates of interest, permitted for shopping centres and a facilitative and forward-looking support provision of short-term financing options for a period of six to 12 months, at lower interest rates, to meet the increased working capital requirements.

Among other relaxations, it had also appealed for GST rebates to offset the losses on account of and for the period of closure of business.

It also said that interest rates should be brought down to "manageable levels" of 5-6% in view of the precarious financial situation.

New Delhi, Jun 18: India on Wednesday took strong exception to China claiming sovereignty over the Galwan Valley in eastern Ladakh, saying its "exaggerated and untenable claims" are contrary to the understanding reached on the issue between the two sides.

Ministry of External Affairs Spokesperson Anurag Srivastava's response came after China claimed that the Galwan Valley in eastern Ladakh is a part of its territory.

"As we have conveyed earlier today, External Affairs Minister and the State Councillor and Foreign Minister of China had a phone conversation on recent developments in Ladakh," Srivastava said late Wednesday night.

"Both sides have agreed that the overall situation should be handled in a responsible manner and that the understandings reached between Senior Commanders on 6th June should be implemented sincerely. Making exaggerated and untenable claims is contrary to this understanding," he said.

Earlier on Wednesday, India delivered a strong message to China that the "unprecedented" incident in the Galwan Valley will have a "serious impact" on the bilateral relationship and held the "pre-meditated" action by Chinese army directly responsible for the violence that left 20 Indian Army personnel dead.

In a telephonic conversation, External Affairs Minister Jaishankar conveyed to his Chinese counterpart Wang Wi India's protest in the "strongest terms" and said the Chinese side should reassess its actions and take corrective steps, the Ministry of External Affairs said.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry, in a statement, said the two sides agreed to "cool down the situation on the ground as soon as possible", and maintain peace and tranquillity in the border area in accordance with the agreement reached so far between the two countries.

The clash in Galwan Valley on Monday night is the biggest confrontation between the two militaries after their 1967 clashes in Nathu La in 1967 when India lost around 80 soldiers while over 300 Chinese army personnel were killed.

The India-China border dispute covers the 3,488-km-long LAC. China claims Arunachal Pradesh as part of southern Tibet, while India contests it.

Prior to the clashes, both sides have been asserting that pending the final resolution of the boundary issue, it is necessary to maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas.