Lawyers Empanelled By Banks Do Not Hold Civil Post, Reservation Under Article 16 Not Applicable To Their Appointment: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently held that the lawyers empanelled by the banks to represent them in cases do not hold a civil post and thus the laws of reservation will not be attracted during their appointment. The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy thus set aside an order of a single judge made last year where the single judge had observed...

Madras High Court Makes Hybrid Hearings Mandatory For State's District Judiciary

The Madras High Court has made hybrid hearings through VC mode mandatory in the district judiciary of the state with effect from February 5th 2024. In a notification issued by the Registrar General of the Madras High Court, the RG said that the mandatory facility has been notified upon approval from the Chief Justice. The notification also urged the members of the bar to use the...

Madras High Court Monthly Roundup January 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 1 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 50NOMINAL INDEX Ganeshkumar v The Principal Secretary to Government, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 1 The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus K.M.Mammen, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 2 ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 3 Dr R Karpagam v Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden and Others, 2024 LiveLaw...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 29 to February 4, 2024

A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 45 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 55 NOMINAL INDEX A.Kaliyaperumal v. The Superintendent of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 45 S Paulraj v The Principal District Judge and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 46 D Senthilkumar v Government of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 47 Annadurai v The Inspector...

Refund Claim Has To Be Examined Based On Documents Pertaining To Availing Of ITC And Export Of Products On Zero Rated Basis: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court, while remanding the matter, held that the refund claim has to be examined and determined based on documents pertaining to the availing of ITC as well as the export of products on a zero-rated basis.The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that the petitioner/assessee has made the refund claims on time and cannot be faulted for the delayed processing...

Electricity Qualifies As Input For Grant Of CENVAT Credit: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that electricity qualifies as an input for the grant of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 (CCR).The Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice R. Vijayakumar have observed that the captive power plant has been set up at substantial cost by the appellant at one of the company locations. The electricity generated has been used as 'input' only...

S. 6 PMLA | Adjudicating Authority Is Not Judicial Or Quasi-Judicial Tribunal Merely Because Procedure Followed Has Judicial Colour: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently held that the Adjudicating Authority under Section 6 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was neither a judicial nor a quasi-judicial tribunal merely because the procedures followed by the authority had some “judicial colour” to it. “We do not find that the Adjudicating Authority is a judicial or quasi judicial Tribunal deciding the rights of...

Revenue Authorities Not Empowered To Issue “No Caste, No Religion Certificate”:Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently observed that while a person could choose not to mention his caste and religion in his documents, the revenue authorities were not empowered to issue a “No Caste No Religion Certificate”. The court observed that issuance of such a certificate will be construed as a general declaration and the Revenue Authorities could not do so in the absence of...

Allowing Trial To Continue Without Identifying Accused Would Embarrass & Vilify Victim, Resulting In Mockery Upon Womanhood: Madras HC Quashes Sexual Abuse Case

The Madras High Court recently quashed a sexual harassment case under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The court added that since the accused person had not been identified for 3 years, continuing the proceedings would be a mockery upon womanhood and bring further embarrassment to the woman who would be put to mental agony. Justice Anand Venkatesh...

S. 19 MV Act | Regional Transport Authority Cannot Pre-Judge Guilt Even Before Filing Of Final Report By Police: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has recently observed that while exercising powers under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicle Act, the Regional Transport Authority cannot pre-judge the guilt of a person charged under a criminal case and seize driving licenses without filing a final report by the police. Justice B Pugalendhi of the Madurai bench was dealing with a batch of pleas seeking directions to...

S. 138 NI Act | Whether Authorised Signatory Will Be Liable Along With Proprietor When Proceedings Are Initiated? Madras HC Refers To Division Bench

The Madras High Court has referred to a division bench the question of whether the proprietor of concern would alone be considered as the drawer of a cheque when a prosecution has been initiated against the proprietary concern under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that there were two contradictory views on the same issue and thus...

MMDR Act | Special Court Cannot Take Cognisance Of Offence, Application For Releasing Vehicle Will Lie Before Magistrate: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently observed that the court competent to initiate confiscation proceedings and issue directions for disposal of seized materials with respect to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act is the Magistrate Court, which is the court competent to take cognisance of the offence. Justice Anand Venkatesh thus took a different view than what had been...