World News | TikTok Could Operate as American Company, Says WH Official
Get latest articles and stories on World at LatestLY. TikTok pulling itself out of its Chinese holding company and operating as an independent American company is a much better solution than banning, a top White House official said on Thursday.
Washington, Jul 16 (PTI) TikTok pulling itself out of its Chinese holding company and operating as an independent American company is a much better solution than banning, a top White House official said on Thursday.
There are reports that TikTok is going to pull out of the holding company, which is China, and operate as an independent American company, White House Economic Advisor Larry Kudlow told reporters here.
When asked whether any American company would like to buy the Chinese firm, he said, "I don't want to speculate on that."
"That's really a market question, but I'm just saying that's a much better solution than banning," he said.
Also Read | Russia Attempted to Hack Coronavirus Vaccine Research, Allege UK, US And Canada.
The top White House economic advisor, responding to another question, said that the servers of TikTok, after becoming an American company, will be in the US and not in China.
A day earlier, the White House indicated that a decision on Chinese banning Chinese mobile applications, including TikTok, could be taken within weeks.
"I do not think there is any self-imposed deadline for action, but I think we are looking at weeks, not months," White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told reporters aboard Air Force One, flying with President Donald Trump form Atlanta.
"There are a number of administration officials who are looking at the national security risk as it relates to TikTok, WeChat and other apps that have the potential for national security exposure, specifically as it relates to the gathering of information on American citizens by a foreign adversary," Meadows said.
The move to ban TikTok in the US has suddenly gained momentum after India last month banned 59 Chinese apps, including TikTok and UC Browser, saying they were prejudicial to the sovereignty, integrity and security of the country.
On Wednesday, a group of 24 influential Republican Congressmen urged President Trump to ban TikTok and other Chinese mobile applications, stating that India has taken the extraordinary step of banning dozens of Chinese-affiliated apps due to national security concerns. PTI LKJ ZH ZH 07162259 NNNNuo and that direction has not been sought to be varied or modified in the present application.
The counsel for the mother-in-law had contended that the July 10, 2019 order was not applicable to her and was only applicable to her daughter-in-law.
This submission was rejected by the high court which said that a plain reading of the order would show that it was a direction to maintain status quo with regard to the property in dispute and was not intended to operate against either woman individually.
"Status quo, regarding title and possession, has been directed to be maintained qua the suit property. Allowing the prayer, in the present application, for a restraint, on the first defendant, from returning to the suit property, would amount to disturbing the status quo..," the high court said.
According to the order, the plaintiff's son and his wife started residing with her since 2014, as licensees, and thereafter "acrimony" developed between the two women and the marital relationship of the daughter-in-law and her husband also soured.
Thereafter, the daughter-in-law allegedly started filing false complaints against her mother-in-law who in April 2018 terminated her licence to reside in the matrimonial home by a legal notice.
"The status of the first defendant in the suit property is, therefore, it is alleged, that of a trespasser as, despite the plaintiff's repeated entreaties to that effect, the first defendant refuses to vacate the suit property. Various alleged incidents of harassment, of the plaintiff by the first defendant, have been adverted to in the plaint," the high court noted.
The mother-in-law has contended that the property was initially purchased in her and her husband's name and later he had gifted his share to her and therefore, she was the sole owner of the residence.
This contention has been disputed by the daughter-in-law who has claimed that the property in question was in the nature of a joint family property, purchased out of joint family funds.
She has also claimed that consequent to the amendment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, her minor daughter is also a coparcener in the suit property.
She has further contended that the property was her matrimonial home and that she could not, therefore, be legally ousted therefrom.
The mother-in-law, in her response, has contended that in a domestic violence case initiated against her by her daughter-in-law, the latter has admitted that the former is the owner of the property in question.
The high court while dismissing the application moved by the mother-in-law, said,"In the present case, the first defendant has squarely questioned the title, of the plaintiff, to the suit property, and has contended that it is joint family property. She has claimed her right, therein, not merely on the ground that it is her matrimonial home, but as the mother of a coparcener to the joint family.
"These disputes required to be adjudicated, in the suit, and no order, interlocutory or otherwise, can be passed on the premise that the plaintiff is right, and the first defendant is wrong."
(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)