Mangoes of Konkan exported abroad from Mopa's cargo hub
Panaji:
The creation of an air cargo logistics hub at the
Manohar International Airport
has kickstarted the export of mangoes from the Konkan region.
The season's first shipment, containing 3,368kg of Alphonso mangoes, was sent to Sharjah on an Air Arabia flight. A total of 600 tonnes of mangoes are expected to be exported to Europe and the UAE in the coming months, said
GMR Goa International Airport Limited
(GGIAL) officials.
The mango consignment was shipped by ShivKonkan Farmer Producer Company Ltd and Shreevali Agro and originated from Sindhudurg district in Maharashtra—part of the famed Alphonso belt that includes Ratnagiri and Devgad. These mangoes have high demand in international markets for their taste and aroma, said a GMR Goa Air Cargo official.
The GGIAL has set up a dedicated packhouse near the airport terminal to clean, sort and prepare farm produce for export. Last year, the cargo hub handled 140 metric tonnes of mango shipments exported to Europe and other parts of the world, including a small quantity of mangoes to Muscat, Oman. The airport has also been exporting lady fingers, bottle gourd and guavas.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Study Anywhere With Lightweight Intel Laptops
Lenovo Student Offers
Learn More
Undo
'By enabling direct air exports, we're not just reducing transit times, but also ensuring that the perishable cargo reaches global markets in peak condition,' said the official.
The airport's cargo hub is emerging as a key player in handling
temperature-sensitive produce
, opening up new business opportunities for local farmers and exporters. The success of this shipment is expected to bolster the region's agri-export potential and provide a boost to the rural economy across the Konkan belt.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
From foes to friends to foes again: What are ten key moments in Trump-Musk fickle relationship?
Image credit: AP In a dramatic 48-hour unraveling, the relationship between US President Donald Trump and billionnaire Elon Musk collapsed spectacularly in full public view. The clash began when Musk openly criticized Trump's proposed 'big beautiful bill,' calling it fiscally irresponsible and disconnected from innovation-driven policy. Trump fired back with threats to revoke federal subsidies and government contracts for Musk's companies, framing the tech billionaire as ungrateful and disloyal. Musk, in turn, escalated the feud, accusing Trump of deception, failed leadership, and clinging to outdated political narratives. What was once a transactional alliance between political power and tech influence has now devolved into a high-profile feud playing out across social media platforms, with implications for business, politics, and the 2024 presidential landscape. However, their relationship has swung from initial disagreements, to standing firmly by each other, and eventually drifting apart once again. Here's a lookback into their hot and cold relationship: 2016: When Musk felt Trump 'not right guy' for US There was a time, not long ago, when Musk publicly noted that Trump's lacked the "character that reflects well on the United States". He had appraised Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton over Republican Donald Trump. "I feel a bit stronger that he is not the right guy," Musk had said about Trump. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 3BHK Transformation Possible for ₹4.5 Lakh? HomeLane Get Quote Undo "He doesn't seem to have the sort of character that reflects well on the United States," he had said. "I don't think this is the finest moment in our democracy," the Tesla CEO added. 2017: Musk joins, then quits Trump's administration Elon Musk left Donald Trump's administration during his first term over differences in opinions on climate change. Musk was a part of a handful of White House advisory boards, including Trump's "manufacturing jobs council." "Climate change is real. Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world," he had said. 2020: Trump calls Musk 'one of our great brains' In 2020, Trump publicly praised Musk during a SpaceX launch, calling him 'one of our great brains' and commending his achievements. However, despite occasional tensions, Musk maintained close ties with the federal government through lucrative SpaceX contracts with Nasa and other agencies. 2022: When Trump called Musk a 'bulls*** artist' Trump, during a rally in 2022, had criticised Musk calling him a "bulls*** artist" for supporting the Democrats in 2016 Presidential elections. 'He said the other day, 'Oh, I've never voted for a Republican'. I said, 'I didn't know that.' He told me he voted for me, so he's another bulls*** artist,' he had said. Two months after this incident, Musk, who bought X, formerly known as Twitter, lifted ban on Trump's social media account. His account was suspended in 2021 following the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, as X's previous management cited the risk of incitement to violence in the wake of the deadly riot led by Trump's supporters. July 2024: Musk's first official endorsement for Trump The X owner's first official endorsement for Trump came on July 13, 2024 (local time), after the then GOP presidential nominee survived an assassination attempt. "I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery," Musk had said. Musk then actively supported Trump's campaign, even appearing alongside him on the trail, and contributed around $277 million to boost Trump and other Republican candidates — primarily through a super PAC he backs, known as America PAC, according to campaign finance records, CBS News reported. The contribution made Musk the single largest donor to either party in the 2024 election cycle, according to federal election commission filings. December 2024: With Trump in office, 'a star is born- Elon' After securing victory in the US presidential elections, Trump, in his victory speech, gave a special mention to Musk saying: 'We have a new star; a star is born- Elon.' 'He's an amazing guy. We were sitting together tonight. You know, he spent two weeks in Philadelphia, in different parts of Pennsylvania, campaigning,' he had said. January 2025: Musk back in Trump admin, spearheading DOGE Trump appointed Musk to head the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a role focused on reducing federal spending. However, the initiative fell significantly short of Musk's ambitious target of saving $1 trillion. And thus began the beginning of a relationship that led Musk publicly professing his love for Trump: "I love @realDonaldTrump as much as a straight man can love another man," he had said. The two leaders made a joint appearance in the Oval Office, where they took questions from the press. Musk was accompanied by his son during the visit. July: Musk criticises 'big beautiful bill' after exiting Trump government Days after exiting Trump administration, Musk took on 'big beautiful bill' saying: "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong." T he outspoken protest marked Musk's first public break with Trump since stepping down from his administration role last week. "Call your Senator, Call your Congressman, Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL," he said. Tensions flared even further when Musk claimed credit for Trump's 2024 victory and dismissed the former president's remarks with a blunt 'Whatever.' 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk claimed. In retaliation, Trump accused Musk of going 'crazy' after losing influence and threatened to cut federal subsidies to Musk's companies. "Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave… and he just went CRAZY!' he said. Musk drops 'Epstein files' bomb In a stunning escalation, Musk accused Trump of being named in the Jeffrey Epstein files — a highly controversial and politically explosive topic that continues to cast a long shadow over American public life. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' he said. "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,' he added. He also criticised Trump's tariffs saying: 'The Trump tariffs will cause a recession in the second half of this year.' Musk calls for new 'American Party' Musk called for the launch of a new political party in the US calling it "The American Party". 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' he said. Based on the X poll results, Musk agreed upon the name 'The America Party'. "The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle! And exactly 80% of people agree. This is fate," he added. Given their history of fickle relationship, will they find their ways back to each other, or is it the beginning of the end?
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Elon Musk vs Donald Trump: New political party ‘The America Party' gains momentum after 80% of X users say yes
Elon Musk and Donald Trump once stood on the same political platform. Now, they're locked in an explosive feud that's playing out across social media—and reshaping America's political landscape. This week, Musk floated the idea of a new centrist political movement . In a viral poll on his social media platform X, he asked: 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' When 80% of respondents said yes, Musk declared, 'The people have spoken. A new political party is needed in America to represent the 80% in the middle! And exactly 80% of people agree. This is fate.' Soon after, he proposed a name: The America Party . It was a direct challenge not only to the Democratic and Republican establishment—but also to the man he once endorsed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Infertile Man Visits Orphanage And Hears, 'Hi Daddy.' Then He Realizes His Late Wife's Cruel Lies Crowdy Fan Undo From MAGA to meltdown Musk and Trump were once politically inseparable. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO had served on Trump's advisory councils, campaigned alongside him, and even formed a political action committee to support Trump's 2024 bid. He appeared at rallies, sported the MAGA cap, stood behind Trump at the swearing-in, and travelled on Air Force One. That partnership is now over. Live Events The split became public when Musk denounced Trump's $2.4 trillion tax-and-spend measure—nicknamed by the former president as his 'big, beautiful bill.' Musk called it a 'disgusting abomination.' The comment surprised Republican leaders and drew an immediate, personal reaction from Trump. 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore,' Trump said from the Oval Office. Trading blows in public Trump then escalated the situation. Writing on Truth Social, he took direct aim at Musk's business interests: 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.' He added, 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' Musk didn't back down. He accused Trump of 'ingratitude' and reposted allegations, without evidence, suggesting Trump's name appeared in official documents tied to Jeffrey Epstein. He also said, 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election,' before adding, 'Such ingratitude.' What followed was a blitz of insults, memes, and viral reactions from both camps and the public. A fractured right wing This clash has deeper implications. Musk had been a key financial supporter of Republican candidates in the 2024 election cycle. His abrupt shift towards centrist politics—if not a full departure from the GOP—could unsettle conservative ranks. By proposing The America Party, Musk has attempted to position himself as a representative of the politically homeless middle. But challenges remain. U.S. election laws make it difficult to secure ballot access across 50 states. While the idea of a centrist third party is not new, no billionaire tech executive has ever tried to build one this publicly. And despite the buzz, Musk cannot run for president due to his South African birth. The U.S. Constitution requires candidates to be natural-born citizens. Online reactions and cultural ripples The feud hasn't just caught the attention of political commentators. It has gone full viral. Social media flooded with memes, TikTok mashups, and hot takes. One user, Brother Nathanael, wrote: 'Elon Musk President USA of The American Party! That presidential look:'. Vivian Jenna Wilson, Musk's estranged daughter and a prominent drag artist, joined the online conversation with a viral post that resonated across LGBTQ+ social media. Her participation added a personal twist to an already highly visible standoff. Meanwhile, the business world also felt the heat. Tesla shares fell by 14%, while Trump Media stock slipped 8%. A disruption in motion For now, The America Party exists only as a name, a poll result, and a few bold posts. But its announcement marks a moment. It underlines the friction between politics and technology. It highlights the instability of alliances based on influence rather than ideology. And it shows how billionaire disputes can quickly spill over into public discourse—with real-world political and economic consequences. Whether Musk's effort becomes a lasting political force or a footnote in internet history is unclear. But one thing is certain—American politics just became even less predictable.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Divorce: Permanent alimony for wife revised by 2.5 times up by SC within 9 years of HC fixing it Rs 20,000 per month
The Supreme Court of India on May 29, 2025, ordered a husband to pay Rs 50,000 per month, which is 2.5 times the permanent alimony, with a 5% increase every two years. Earlier, the permanent alimony amount fixed by the Calcutta High Court in 2016 was Rs 20,000, with an increase of 5% every three years. The Supreme Court said: 'The wife, who in this case has remained unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future.' Moreover, the Supreme Court also upheld the Calcutta High Court order, which asked the husband to redeem the home loan taken on the house and transfer the title deed to his former wife's name. The husband did not fight this point and duly complied with the order, but he challenged the fact of paying alimony for both his wife and son. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like When the Camera Clicked at the Worst Possible Time Read More Undo He, however, contended that his son is now 26 years old and is non-dependent. The husband also said that while it's true his income level has increased since the time of their divorce , he has since then remarried, and he has ageing parents also to take care of. After hearing and analysing the facts of the case, the Supreme Court said that, while they can't direct the husband to pay maintenance to his son, the son's right to inheritance remains unaffected, and any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in accordance with the law. Hence, the Supreme Court accepted the husband's lawyer's contention about paying child maintenance but rejected his reservations about paying a higher alimony to the wife. Live Events The SC also said: 'Having considered the submissions and materials on record, we are of the view that the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court requires revision. The husband's income, financial disclosures, and past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount.' Read below to understand the rationale behind the Supreme Court's decision to more than double the monthly permanent alimony, along with the legal reasoning behind it. How did this alimony case go on for 17 years? According to the order of the Supreme Court dated May 29, 2025, here's a timeline of events: June 18, 1997: The couple married following Hindu ceremonies. August 5, 1998: A son was born to the newly married couple. July 2008: The husband filed Matrimonial Suit No. 430 of 2008 under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, seeking dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty allegedly inflicted by the wife. Subsequently, the wife filed Misc. Case No. 155 of 2008 in the same suit under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking interim maintenance for herself and the minor son. January 14, 2010: The Trial Court, by order dated January 14, 2010, awarded interim maintenance of Rs 8,000 per month, along with Rs 10,000 for litigation expenses, to the wife. March 28, 2014: The wife then instituted a case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Trial Court, vide order dated March 28, 2014, directed the husband to pay maintenance of Rs 8,000 per month to the wife and Rs 6,000 per month to the minor son, along with Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. May 14, 2015: Aggrieved by this order, the husband filed an appeal before the Calcutta High Court. The High Court, by order dated May 14, 2015, directed the husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs 15,000 per month. January 10, 2016: The Trial Court, vide order dated January 1, 2016, dismissed the matrimonial suit, finding that the respondent-husband had failed to prove cruelty. July 14, 2016: Subsequently, by order dated July 14, 2016, the High Court noted that the respondent-husband was drawing a net monthly salary of Rs 69,000 and enhanced the interim maintenance to Rs 20,000 per month. June 25, 2019: The High Court, by order dated June 25, 2019, allowed the husband's appeal, granted a decree of divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage. February 20, 2023: The Supreme Court of India issued a notice confined to the question of enhancement of permanent alimony awarded to the wife. November 7, 2023: By interim order dated November 7, 2023, the Supreme Court, noting the absence of representation on behalf of the husband despite proof of service, enhanced the monthly maintenance to Rs 75,000 with effect from November 1, 2023. The husband subsequently entered the appearance and filed an application seeking vacation of the said interim order. May 29, 2025: The Supreme Court's final judgement ordered the husband to pay Rs 50,000 per month as permanent alimony, with a 5% increase every two years. Legal arguments used by husband and wife The wife asks, why is she getting Rs 20,000 per month as alimony when her former husband is earning Rs 4 lakh per month? The former wife's lawyers said before the Supreme Court of India: 'The appellant-wife contends that the amount of Rs 20,000 per month, which the High Court made final, was originally awarded as interim maintenance. She submits that the respondent-husband has a monthly income of approximately Rs 4,00,000 and the quantum of alimony awarded is not commensurate with the standard of living maintained by the parties during marriage.' The husband counters his former wife's argument by saying he has to support expenses for his second marriage and old parents The husband's lawyers said before the Supreme Court of India: 'In response, the respondent-husband submits that his current net monthly income is Rs 1,64,039, earned from his employment. He has submitted salary slips, bank statements, and income tax returns for the year 2023-2024. He also submits that his monthly household expenses total Rs 1,72,088 and that he has remarried, has a dependent family, and aged parents. The husband contends that their son, now 26 years of age, is no longer financially dependent.' What did the Supreme Court of India say? According to the order of the Supreme Court dated May 29, 2025, here are the details: Having considered the submissions and materials on record, we are of the view that the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court requires revision. The respondent-husband's income, financial disclosures, and past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. The appellant-wife, who has remained unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future. Furthermore, the inflationary cost of living and her continued reliance on maintenance as the sole means of financial support necessitate a reassessment of the amount. The Supreme Court's final judgement: Pay former wife Rs 50,000 per month as permanent alimony The Supreme Court said: In our considered opinion, a sum of Rs 50,000 per month would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for the appellant-wife. This amount shall be subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years. As regards the son, now aged 26, we are not inclined to direct any further mandatory financial support. However, it is open to the respondent-husband to voluntarily assist him with educational or other reasonable expenses. We clarify that the son's right to inheritance remains unaffected, and any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in accordance with law. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is modified to the extent that the permanent alimony payable to the appellant-wife shall be Rs 50,000 per month, subject to a 5% increase every two years, as noted above. Nikita Anand, Partner at Magnus Legal Services LLP, says: 'Maintenance is not charity but a right that must be calibrated to genuine financial realities and the lifestyle disruption caused by marital breakdown. The days of token alimony amounts may well be numbered.' Arnaz Hathiram, a digital media professional, says: "This is a classic case where alimony is granted by default irrespective of the outcome of the main divorce case. In the current scenario, parties had been separated since 2008 where maintenance to wife was granted on the husband's then income. In 2025, the Supreme Court has enhanced permanent alimony to the wife even where cruelty by her had been proven and divorce was granted to the husband on grounds of cruelty. When courts award alimony to wives despite cruelty proven, it leaves the husbands - who approach court for justice - with very little hope. In my opinion, the husband in this case just got freedom, not justice." Neelam Singh, Advocate on Record, Lucknow High Court, says: 'This judgment holds immense significance for women who, after divorce, are left unheard and unsupported when it comes to claiming maintenance from their husbands. Many are forced to run from pillar to post, struggling through the legal system just to secure a rightful order for themselves and their children—simply to survive with dignity in society. Prachi Dubey, Advocate, Delhi High Court, "By increasing the wife's maintenance to Rs 50,000 with incremental raises every second year, the court upheld in past decisions that inflation should be considered while providing spousal support and should be reflective of the standard of living during the marriage. It also made distinction between spousal and child support, maintained the position with respect to the son's rights to inherit, and accepted tacitly that the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage is a ground for divorce." Singh adds: 'This judgment sets a significant precedent for wives and legitimate children who are often left with no option but to repeatedly approach the court to seek a dignified standard of living and rightful maintenance from their husband or father. It establishes a benchmark that reinforces the court's role as a guardian of justice—offering hope and support to women seeking financial stability and to children who depend on their father's support as they grow. It is indeed a remarkable, meaningful, and much-needed ruling that upholds both fairness and compassion.' Priyanka Desai, Co-founder and Partner, The Fort Circle, says: This judgment clarifies that maintenance can be increased based on the husband's higher income, irrespective of his remarriage. It also holds that financial support is not mandatory for a child who has attained majority. A key takeaway is that the maintenance amounts mentioned in the divorce decree is not set in stone and may be modified based on changed circumstances. Anand says: 'The Supreme Court refused to accept the husband's claimed reduction in income at face value. Despite his assertion that his current monthly net income was Rs 1,64,039, the court considered his "past earnings" and professional background, including his previous employment with a hotel at an annual salary exceeding Rs 21 lakh. This sends a clear warning that spouses cannot deliberately reduce their income or accept lower-paying positions to evade maintenance obligations. The court's approach creates a stronger deterrent against income suppression tactics and encourages a more robust assessment of a party's true earning potential based on their professional trajectory and historical income patterns.' Ruchita Datta, Partner, D&T JURIS, says: "The instant judgement is a reiteration of the fact that while deciding the alimony amount the court needs to weigh in various factors viz., residential rights, wife's status of living before divorce, any medical ailment, dependence of children, Inflation rates etc. In this case, the wife remained unmarried and had no other source of income to sustain herself except the amount which has been provided to her by her husband. So, therefore the amount of ₹20,000 provided to her as an alimony by the High court was enhanced by the Supreme Court to ₹50,000 per month along with 5 % increase after every two years keeping in mind the high cost of living and the prevailing inflation. In my opinion, it is imperative to be pragmatic while deciding the alimony amount as the amount so awarded will not only cater to her basic needs of sustenance but also provide her with a life of dignity and respect."
