A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 504 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 510 NOMINAL INDEX Tmt.R.Nalini v Tmt.R.Nirmala, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 504 GP Bhaskar v Sumathi and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 505 Narendra Kumar Gupta v State rep by Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, 2022 LiveLaw...
A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court and its subordinate courts.
Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 504 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 510
NOMINAL INDEX
Tmt.R.Nalini v Tmt.R.Nirmala, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 504
GP Bhaskar v Sumathi and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 505
Narendra Kumar Gupta v State rep by Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 506
Isha Foundation v Union of India and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 507
S Selvaraj Simpson v The District Collector and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 508
M Ramya v N Satish Kumar, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 509
M/s. Raj Kishore Engineering Construction (P) Ltd. Versus The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) II, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 510
REPORTS
Case Title: Tmt.R.Nalini v Tmt.R.Nirmala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 504
The Madras High Court has held that the Revenue Divisional Officer, which is a rent authority, does not have powers to order for recovery of possession as per the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017.
Justice SM Subramaniam observed that as per Section 21(2) of the Act, a "rent court" could make an order for the recovery of possession of the premises.
Case Title: GP Bhaskar v Sumathi and another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 505
The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on a litigant who had initiated contempt proceedings against a presiding judge of family court claiming that the family court did not comply with high court directions to dispose of his divorce petition within a time frame.
Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan directed the petitioner to deposit the amount to the relief fund of the Chief Justice of the High Court within a period of two weeks.
The court noted that even though the High Court had directed the Family Court to dispose of the divorce petition by 11.01.2017, soon after, the petitioner had filed an appeal against an order of interim monthly maintenance.
Case Title: Narendra Kumar Gupta v State rep by Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 506
While allowing the bail plea of a man charged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Madras High Court reiterated that personal liberty could not be arbitrarily taken away unless in accordance with law.
The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira, after observing that the petitioner was also suffering from a medical condition remarked that the man needed medical intervention.
Since there was no concrete ground for denial of personal liberty and being satisfied that the petitioner had complied with the twin conditions for granting bail, the court allowed the petition on the condition that the petitioner shall deposit the title deeds of immovable property worth 5 crores and executing a bond for a sum of rupees ten thousand.
Case Title: Isha Foundation v Union of India and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 507
Madras High Court on Wednesday allowed Isha Foundation's plea against a show cause notice issued to it in Tamil Nadu for carrying out construction work between 2006-2014 at Coimbatore without obtaining mandatory environmental clearance as per the Central Government's Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006.
The bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice D Krishnakumar observed that since the foundation was carrying on construction work for promoting group development activities and for promoting yoga, it came within the definition of an educational institution and thus was exempted from seeking prior environmental clearance.
Case Title: S Selvaraj Simpson v The District Collector and another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 508
The Madras High Court has recently held that though the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents & Senior Citizens Act provides for declaring certain property transfers as void, a settlement of property cannot be cancelled unless it fulfills the conditions of the Act.
While dismissing a litigant's plea seeking directions to the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider his application, Justice R Subramanian observed that since the settlement deed did not contain a clause imposing an obligation on the settlee or transferree to maintain the settlor or transferor, the authority could not entertain an application for cancelling the settlement deed.
Case Title: M Ramya v N Satish Kumar
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 509
Observing that the delay in disposal of the maintenance petitions infringes the fundamental right of the minor children, the Madras High Court has said that the family courts dealing with matrimonial matters must ensure that the interest of minor children is taken care of and their livelihood is protected by all possible means.
Justice SM Subramaniam took note of a submission that courts across Tamil Nadu are delaying the proceedings in maintenance petitions by not disposing the petitions or even granting interim maintenance.
Justice Subramaniam stressed that courts must consider social implications of such cases and consider the interest and livelihood of the children. "...and in case the mother, who filed the maintenance petition is unemployed, then interim maintenance must be ordered to protect the livelihood of the child in the custody of the moth," the bench added.
7. Madras High Court Quashes Non-Speaking Order Cancelling GST Registration
Case Title: M/s. Raj Kishore Engineering Construction (P) Ltd. Versus The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) II
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 510
The Madras High Court has quashed the order canceling GST registration without referring to the reason for the non-filing GSTR-3B return.
The single bench of Justice M. Sundar has remitted the matter back to the appellate authority with a directive to examine the matter on the merits based on available records and based on the opportunity already given to the writ petitioner/assessee under sub-section (8) of Section 107 of the CGST Act.
OTHER DEVELOPMENT
1. Madras High Court Seeks State's Response On Plea For Setting Up Libraries In Prisons
Case Title: Saha AV v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others
Case No: WP (MD) 27463 of 2022
Madras High Court has directed the State of Tamil Nadu to file its response to a plea seeking setting up of libraries in all the prisons in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu.
The petitioner had sought for maintaining library with sufficient number of books, to maintain a digital library with necessary infrastructure, and to appoint a qualified librarian in all Central Prison, Special Prison for Women, District Jail, Borstal School, Open Air Prison, Juvenile home, Sub-Jails for Men and Women in Southern Parts of Tamil Nadu.
Case Title: Shankar @ Savukku Shankar v State of Tamil Nadu and others
Case No: WP No. 33617 of 2022
YouTuber and Activist Savukku Shankar has approached the Madras High Court with a petition accusing jail authorities of beating up inmates in Cuddalore Central Prison.
Justice G Chandrasekharan has directed the State to respond to the petition within a week.
He has alleged that while he was incarcerated, he came to know that a prisoner Kannan was being kept in solitary confinement and was regularly beaten up by Senthil Kumar, the Superintendent of Cuddalore Central Prison.
The petition alleges that eight other prisoners were similarly kept in solitary confinement and were regularly beaten up by the Prison Superintendent.
Alleging no action was taken by the authorities, Shankar has now approached the High Court seeking directions to the respondents for consideration of his representations. He has also prayed for appropriate disciplinary action against the officer.
3. Madras High Court To Decide Maintainability Of Plea Seeking Disqualification Of Governor RN Ravi
Case Title: M Kannadasan v Union Of India
Case No: WP 133846 of 2022 (Filing No.)
The Madras High Court on Thursday reserved orders on the maintainability of a plea by Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam challenging the authority by which Governor RN Ravi is continuing to hold office as he has been appointed as the Chairman of the Auroville foundation.
The petitioner had submitted that as per Section 13 of the Auroville Foundation Act, the Chairman was entitled to salaries and allowances along with other benefits like leave, pension, provident fund etc as fixed by the Central Government. Drawing attention to Article 158(2) of the Constitution of India which prohibits the Governor from holding any other office of profit, Kannadasan submitted that the moment Ravi accepted the position of Chairman, he was disqualified to continue in the office of the Governor.
4. Madras HC Advocates' Association Assures High Court That Its Elections Will Be Free And Fair
Case Title: S Mahaveer Shivaji v. the Advocate General and others
Case No: WP 33639 of 2022 (Bar Council Cases)
Madras High Court Advocates' Association (MHAA) has informed the Madras High Court that its elections, which are scheduled to be conducted on 9th January, 2023, would be conducted in a free and fair manner.
The submission was made before the bench of Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Sathya Narayana Prasad in response to a plea filed by an advocate alleging large scale irregularities in the manner of conducting allegations.
The Association also informed the court that all the applications were being scrutinized diligently to ensure that the elections would be conducted without any bias. The Association also submitted that it would ensure the principle of one bar one vote is followed so that an advocate casts only one vote even if he/she is member in different bars.