Tag: insufficient

cryptocurrencyeconomyfinancetechnical analysistrading

XRP at $2.40 – Which way will XRP’s price go next?

admin

The post XRP at $2. 40 Which way will XRP’s price go next? appeared com. Key Takeaways What was the significance of the $2. 7 area on the price chart? Analysis showed that it has been a key support since August. The build-up of short liquidation levels meant it could be retested before the next bearish move. What would convince swing traders to lean bullishly? If the $2. 8 area is reclaimed as a demand zone, it would show traders that buyers were strong enough to attempt a recovery past $3. Ripple [XRP] was trading at the $2. 42 mark at the time of writing, and signaled bearish momentum in the short-term. Sellers had the upper hand for now and could force a price move toward the psychological $2 support. Technical analysis shows XRP could see a 22% price drop The swing points on the weekly timeframe were marked in green, at $0. 486 and $3. 4. The rally from $1. 61 to $3. 66 that began in April meant that the weekly structure was bullish, making it the long-term outlook for XRP. A move below $1. 6 would be needed to shift the swing structure bearishly. The internal structure’s local high and low are marked in orange at $3. 1 and $2. 7. The swing structure was bullish, due to the rally from $1. 9 to $3. 66 in June and July. However, the bias for now is bearish. This is because XRP bulls had defended the $2. 7-$2. 8 demand zone from bearish retests since July, but the recent selling pressure forced the price to break down beneath this support. This breakdown left behind a large imbalance, highlighted by the white box. This zone, from $2. 5-$2. 77, represented a sturdy obstacle for the buyers. The Moving Averages were bearish, as was the Awesome Oscillator. However, the CMF has climbed to +0. 05, at press time, a sign.

businesscriminalentertainmentindialawsuit

Rajkumar Santoshi gets summoned on October 27 after Jamnagar Court dismisses his appeal in the Rs. 1 crore cheque bounce case

admin

Filmmaker Rajkumar Santoshi, known for directing acclaimed films such as Ghayal, Damini, and Andaz Apna Apna, has faced a major legal setback after the Jamnagar sessions court dismissed his appeal in a cheque-bouncing case. The ruling, delivered on Thursday, October 15, upheld an earlier order passed by the Special Negotiable Instruments Court in Jamnagar, which had convicted Santoshi for issuing cheques that were dishonoured. According to reports, the case stems from a loan of Rs. 1 crore that businessman Ashok Lal had allegedly lent to the filmmaker. To repay the borrowed amount, Santoshi issued post-dated cheques of Rs. 10 lakh each. However, when Lal presented the cheques for clearance, the bank reportedly returned them unpaid due to insufficient funds. Following the dishonour of the cheques, Lal approached the Special Negotiable Instruments Court, which ruled in his favour. The court convicted Santoshi under provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, ordering him to repay double the cheque amount and sentencing him to two years of imprisonment. Challenging this order, Santoshi filed an appeal in the Jamnagar sessions court. However, after reviewing the evidence and the previous judgment, the sessions court dismissed his appeal and affirmed the lower court’s decision. In its directive, the sessions court has now instructed Rajkumar Santoshi to appear before it by October 27. The order further states that an arrest warrant will be issued if the filmmaker fails to comply within the given timeframe. The case adds to the list of legal troubles faced by Santoshi in recent years. The filmmaker, who has been a part of the Hindi film industry for over three decades, has yet to comment publicly on the court’s latest ruling. On the work front, Santoshi is currently completing work on Lahore 1947, produced by Aamir Khan, which also stars Sunny Deol, Preity Zinta, Sunny’s son Karan Deol, among others. With the sessions court’s decision reinforcing the earlier conviction, Rajkumar Santoshi’s legal options now appear limited, unless he seeks relief from a higher court before the stipulated deadline. Also Read: Producers put a ‘no-can-do’ clause in contracts regarding extra demands of stars: “If a star halts shoot to get a favourite ice-cream from the other end of town, he or she better pay for the ice-cream and the delay,” says Rajkumar Santoshi.