Madras High Court Quarterly Digest: July - September, 2024 [Citations 266 - 370]

NOMINAL INDEX

K Nizamuddin v The Chief Secretary to Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 266

Balakrishna Reddy v State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 267

Mr.P.N.Vignesh v The Chairman and Members of the Bar Council, BCI, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 268

M/s.Practo Technologies Pvt.Ltd v The Tamil Nadu Chemists and Druggists Association and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 269

T.S.Jawahar Ali Khan v State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 270

Porkodi v State and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 271

C.Aranganayagam (Deceased) v The State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 272

D Prabhu v The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 273

Sri Nithyanadha Swami v .Sri La Sri Harihara, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 274

SV Subbiah v Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 275

G Karthikeyan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 276

Arjunan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 277

High Court of Madras v D Sasikumar and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 278

Ghanshyam Hemdev v Pyramid Audio India Pvt Ltd and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 279

G.Abdul Khadar Ibrahim v Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 280

Thameem Sindha Madar v The District Collector and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 281

Kajendran J v Superintendent of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 282

K Govindaraj v Union of India and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 283

Kandasamy v The District Superintendent of Police and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 284

State of Tamil Nadu and Others v All India Private Schools Legal Protection Society, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 285

Sapphire Foods India Ltd v The Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 286

Raja Murrugan v Superintendent of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 287

The Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Chennai Versus R.Muniyandi, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 288

Karthikeyan and Others v Thangapandian, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 289

Arulraj and another v The Inspector of Police and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 290

Thejo Engineering Limited Versus The Deputy Director of Income Tax, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 291

Vipul Kumar Tulsian and anr vs M/s.Sundaram Finance Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 292

Larsen & Toubro Limited vs M/s.Texmo Pipes and Products Limited, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 293

The Secretary, Tamilnadu Legislative Assembly v P Sivakumar (batch cases), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 294

Deepak and Another v The Chief Educational Officer and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 295

Felix Jerald v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 296

Natraj v Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 297

A Manikandan v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 298

M Kathirvel v The Inspector General of Registration, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 299

Kompress India Private Limited Versus Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 300

NT Stalin Barathi v The District Collector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 301

P.Sibiga Dharshini v The District Collector and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 302

Suo Motu RC v Additional Superintendent of Police and Suo Motu RC v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 303

Anitha R Radhakrishnan v The Directorate of Enforcement and another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 304

G Pandi v The District Collector and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 305

A Kamala v State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 306

The Official Assignee v S Arjunlal Sunderdas (Died) and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 307

Kannan Swaminathan v Union of India and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 308

T Balaji v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 309

D Kumaresh v The Chief Secretary, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 310

C. Ve Shanmugam v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 311

A Krishna Prasath v The Director General of Police and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 312

C Ve Shanmugam v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 313

M/s.Jindal Pipes Limited Versus The Deputy State Tax Officer (Int), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 314

V Senthil v The Secretary, Bar Council of TN & Puducherry, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 315

K Amrithalal v The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 316

M Selva Kumar v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 317

Nishithkumar Mukeshkumar Mehta vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 318

Mr G Venkateshan v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 319

Sathiyamurthy v Arputha Mary, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 320

Maharaja v Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 321

S.Doctor Viswanathan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 322

Viterra India Pvt Ltd. Versus The Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 323

Siva Vijayan v Home Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 324

Dharani v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 325

Preetha v Inspector of Police and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 326

Manohar Thangaraj v Rt.Rev.ARGST Barnabas and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 327

M/s. Ohm Sakthi Blue Metals Versus The Superintendent of GST & Central Excise, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 328

Tvl.Deepa Traders Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 329

The State of Tamil Nadu v. SG Pushpalatha Gracelin and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 330

R Rakkiyappan v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 331

CS Vaidyanathan v The Commissioner, HR & CE Department, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 332

ANS Prasad v The Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 333

The Project Director, National Highways Vs. R.KaThe Project Director, National Highways No.45E & 220, National Highways Authority of India vs M.Mallika Begam and anr, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 334

BL Madhavan v The Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 335

ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 336

V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 337

Tamil Selvan v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 338

Shobha Karandlaje v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 339

Usha v The Director General of Police and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 340

Thirumurugan v The State and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 341

Durai Murugan @ Sattai Durai Murugan v The Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 342

M/s. Bala Bhavan Educational Trust v. Regional Transport Officer, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 343

CS Nandhakumar v The Commissioner of Police (Traffic Wing) and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 344

V Mahalakshmi v The Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 345

The Principal Secretary v Athipathi, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 346

M/s. S. R. Steels v. The Deputy State Tax Officer, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 347

Vijayraj Surana v Assistant Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 348

Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349

Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Avant Garde Healthcare and Engg Solutions Pvt Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

Jaffer Sadiq v The Assistant Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 351

A.Nivetha v The Secretary to Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

R Lalithsharma v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 353

Pallab Sinha and another v The Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 354

M/s Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 355

Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

Ramesh Flowers Private Limited v. Mr.Sumit Srimal, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 357

S.Muralidharan v Madras High Court and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

TNEB Accounts and Executive Staff Union v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 359

Hameed Ibrahim v The Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 360

Marathal (Died) and Another v. Kanniammal (Died) and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 361

R.Gnana Sundari v T.Yesuraj, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 362

ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 363

T.Muthu Irulappa v The State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 364

ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 365

A. Guruvammal v The Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 366

Ankur Grand Owners Association v The District Registrar (Admin), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 367

The Principal & Secretary v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 368

Mr.Mani @ Velumani v The State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

Karthik Parthiban v The Superintendent of Police and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 370

REPORTS

CCTVs Installed In 99% Police Stations, Footage To Be Preserved For 18 Months: TN Govt Tells Madras High Court

Case Title: K Nizamuddin v The Chief Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 266

The Madras High Court recently closed a public interest litigation seeking to frame standard operating procedures for preserving, protecting and maintaining the CCTV footages inside police stations and ensuring its availability to prevent possible human rights violation.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq closed the plea after considering the State's plea that CCTV cameras have been installed in almost 99% of the police stations and steps have been taken to preserve the footage for a period of 18 months.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Conviction Of Former TN Minister Balakrishna Reddy In Alleged Rioting Case

Case Title: Balakrishna Reddy v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 267

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside the conviction and sentence imposed om former Tamil Nadu Minister Balakrishna Reddy.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that there were several lacunas in the prosecution case and the benefit had to be given to the appellant (Balakrishnan). The orders were passed on appeals preferred by Reddy and others challenging his conviction.

In January 2019, a special court had convicted Reddy to 3 year imprisonment in a 1998 arson case in connection with a protest against illicit liquor. Over 150 villagers had gathered in front of Bagalur Police Station and protested against police inaction in removing illicit arrack units in the area. The special court had convicted Reddy after noting the damage to public property, and burning of police vehicles.

“Legal Service Is Not Business”: Madras HC Asks State Bar Councils To Take Action Against Lawyers Soliciting Work Through Online Service Providers

Case Title: Mr.P.N.Vignesh v The Chairman and Members of the Bar Council, BCI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 268

The Madras High Court has come down heavily on lawyers soliciting work through online websites in violation of Bar Council of India Rules. The court has asked the Bar Council of India to issue circulars/instructions/guidelines to State Bar Councils to initiate disciplinary proceedings against lawyers for advertising or soliciting their services directly or indirectly.

The court added that action should be taken against any form of advertising including furnishing newspaper comments, or producing photographs to be published in connection with cases, etc.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted that the legal profession, unlike others, was not a job or a business and the intention was to provide welfare to the society. The court added that though a fee was paid to the lawyers, it was paid out of respect for their time and knowledge. The court added that providing ranking or customer ratings to lawyers demeaned the profession and was against dignity and integrity.

Madras High Court Orders Status Quo On Online Sale Of Drugs Till Finalisation Of Draft Rules, Asks Govt To Ensure Sale Only Through Licensed Chemists

Case Title: M/s.Practo Technologies Pvt.Ltd v The Tamil Nadu Chemists and Druggists Association and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 269

The Madras High Court recently disposed of an appeal against an order of a single judge prohibiting the online sale of drugs and cosmetics.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan took note of the Government's submission that it was in the process of finalizing a new policy. The court directed the Union Government and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation to expedite and finalize the police and notify the same.

Till such time, the court ordered status quo on the condition that online sale of drugs must be made only through or by licensed Druggists and Chemists. The court directed the competent authorities to initiate appropriate action against the individual offenders in the manner known to the law. The court noted that the policy will have far-reaching consequences and the Government would have to consider various issues raised by the stakeholders.

Disciplinary Authority Must Record Reasons If Disagree With Enquiry Authority: Madras High Court

Case Title: T.S.Jawahar Ali Khan v State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 270

A single judge bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, while deciding a Writ Petition held that the disciplinary authority must record its reasons for disagreeing with the findings of the enquiry authority against an employee's dismissal.

After Special Sunday Hearing, Madras High Court Allows BSP Leader Armstrong's Burial To Be Held At Thiruvallur

Case Title: Porkodi v State and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 271

After a special hearing held on Sunday morning, the Madras High Court permitted the burial of late Bahujan Samaj Party Tamil Nadu chief Armstrong to be held at a private property in Pothur Village in Thiruvallur district in Tamil Nadu. The court also gave liberty to the petitioners to approach the authority if they intended to construct a memorial manimandapam, hospital, school etc in Armstrong's name.

Justice Bhavani Subbaroyan also asked all parties to co-operate with the government and conduct the burial procession in a peaceful manner. The court further directed the police to give appropriate police protection for the procession.

The court passed orders on petition filed by wife of late BSP leader K Armstrong seeking permission to bury his body in the party office at Chennai.

Madras High Court Refuses To Set Aside Conviction Of Former Tamil Nadu Minister Aranganayagam In Disproportionate Asset Case

Case Title: C.Aranganayagam (Deceased) v The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 272

The Madras High Court recently refused to set aside the conviction of former Tamil Nadu Labour Minister C Aranganayagam in a disproportionate assets case. While the court dismissed an appeal preferred by Arangayagam, it also upheld the acquittal of Anraganayagam's family members.

Justice G Jayachandran thus confirmed the confiscation of properties of Arangayagam, who passed away on April 29, 2021.

The case against Arangayagam was that while serving as the Minister for Labour and Education, during 1991-1996, he had accumulated wealth disproportionate to his income. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai registered a case and he was charged with offenses under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Along with Arangayagam, a case was also registered against his wife and two sons for abetment.

Tamil Nadu Govt Should Revisit Its Liquor Policy For Welfare Of Citizens; Present Rules Appear To Protect TASMAC Shops, Bars: High Court

Case Title: D Prabhu v The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 273

The Madras High Court recently noted that it was high time that the Government of Tamil Nadu rethink its liquor policy for the welfare of the people in the state, especially the younger generation who are the pillars of tomorrow.

The court added that a conscious decision could be taken based on public opinion and though taking a decision may not be an easy task, that should not justify the State's support to the liquor policy presently in place.

The bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice G Arul Murugan noted that the Government Rules, regarding the location of TASMAC shops, should be for the protection and welfare of the people. However, presently, the Rules appear to be made to protect the TASMAC shops whose aim is to enhance the sale of intoxicating material that ultimately affect the society.

Madurai Adheenam Succession Row: Madras High Court Dismisses Nityananda Sami's Plea Against Substituting Senior Pontiff In Suit

Case Title: Sri Nithyanadha Swami v .Sri La Sri Harihara

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 274

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by Sri Nithyananda Swami challenging an order of the Principal Subordinate Court, Madurai allowing successor senior pontiff Sri Harihara Gnanasambanda Desiga Paramachariya Swamigal to be added to the suit pending in relation to appointment of a junior pontiff to the Madurai Adheenam.

Justice R Vijayakumar opined that the application for amendment did not call for any interference.

Direct Govt Officers, Pleaders To Conduct Land Cases Properly; Initiate Action Against Them In Case Of Ex-Parte Decrees: Madras HC To State

Case Title: SV Subbiah v Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 275

The Madras High Court has recently directed the State Government to issue appropriate circulars to all District Collectors, competent authorities and to Government Pleaders indicating them to conduct Government-related land cases properly and defend the government on merits and per the law.

The court also called for coordination between Government Pleaders and officials for defending cases across courts in the State.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan added that in case of any ex-parte decree being passed by the courts, any improper conduct by the Government Pleader or official concerned must be identified and the competent authority must initiate appropriate action.

“Discriminates Based On Sex”: Madras High Court Strikes Down Govt Order Reserving Compassionate Appointment In Noon Meal Schemes For Women

Case Title: G Karthikeyan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 276

The Madras High Court recently declared illegal, a Government Order (GO) reserving compassionate appointments in the Noon Meal Scheme to females.

Noting that the GO was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that it not only affected the male children of female employees but put the female employees a par below to that of their male counterparts.

The court noted that if 100% of the vacancies in a particular department are reserved for women, the applications for compassionate appointment could be forwarded to the District Collector or to the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department to be considered under the general pool for being appointed in other suitable posts.

When Those Knowingly Consuming Spurious Liquor Can Be Given Rs 10 Lakh,Innocent Victims Deserve No Less: Madras HC In Burn Victim's Case

Case Title: Arjunan v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 277

While granting compensation to the family of a man who succumbed to burn injuries sustained while disposing of bio-medical waste, the Madras High Court recently remarked that when the government could pay families of persons who knowingly consumed spurious liquor Rs. 10 Lakh, the innocent victims deserved no less.

Justice GR Swaminathan added that it was unfortunate that the State resisted such applications in which it should have conceded the prayer straightaway. The court noted that it was an apposite case for invoking the Doctrine of Benevolent exercise of Power and thus granted compensation to the family.

Madras High Court Sentences Thiruvarur Sub-Registrar To 2 Months Imprisonment For Fabricating Court Documents In Connivance With Litigant

Case Title: High Court of Madras v D Sasikumar and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 278

The Madras High Court has recently sentenced Sub-Registrar, Thiruvarur to two months of simple imprisonment for conniving with a private individual and fabricating documents which were produced in court for getting favorable orders. The court, however, suspended the execution of imprisonment for 30 days allowing the parties to file an appeal.

Justice N Sathish Kumar observed that if the court shuts its eye to such actions, it would encourage unscrupulous officials to engage in such activities with private individuals and achieve their goals. The court thus emphasized that such fabrication of documents could not be condoned especially in registering officers where the entries have a bearing on the rights of the individuals.

Madras High Court Stays Re-Release Of Kamal Hassan Starrer Film “Guna”Amidst Copyright Infringement Claims

Case Title: Ghanshyam Hemdev v Pyramid Audio India Pvt Ltd and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 279

The Madras High Court has stayed the re-release of Kamal Hassan starrer 1991 Tamil Movie “Gunaa” amidst copyright infringement claims.

Justice P Velmurugan granted an ad-interim injunction on an application made by Ghanshyam Hemdev. Noting that the balance of convenience favored Hemdev, the court was inclined to grant the ad interim injunction. Meanwhile, the court also issued notices to the respondents, Pyramid Audio India Pvt Ltd, Evergreen Media Pvt Ltd, and Prasad Film Laboratories.

“India Land Of Diverse Religions & Customs”: Madras High Court Sets Aside Punishment On Muslim Policeman For Keeping Beard

Case Title: G.Abdul Khadar Ibrahim v Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 280

The Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of a police constable, who was punished for keeping a beard "following the commandments of Prophet Mohammed".

Stating that India is a land of diverse religions and customs, bench of Justice L Victoria Gowri held though police department warranted maintaining strict discipline, it would not mean that a personnel belonging to the minority community can be punished for maintaining a beard.

The court noted that as per an Office Memorandum issued to the Madras Police Gazette, while permission could not be granted to officers to maintain beard, Muslim police officers were entitled to maintain a beard throughout their lifetime.

Madras High Court Allows Muharram Processions In Ervadi, Says Fundamental Rights Must Take Precedence Over Fundamentalist Forces

Case Title: Thameem Sindha Madar v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 281

The Madras High Court has allowed the conducting of Muharram ceremonies with the beat of drums, santhanakoodu, and Kuthirai pancha processions in the Ervadi Town in Tirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu.

Justice GR Swaminathan emphasized that the right to conduct a religious procession was protected under Article 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution and it was not open for members of fundamentalist Thowheed Jamath to dictate how other members should conduct the festival. The court also added that when one's fundamental rights were under threat, the administration had a duty to uphold the rights but it was unfortunate that the administration had succumbed to the threats held out by the Thowheed Jamath members.

The court also remarked that like language, religion was not the same everywhere, and if the people in Ervadi believed in Music, the beat of drums, horse, and chariot processions, to expect them to conform to Saudi Arabian practice was nothing short of a Talibanic outlook.

Minor Girl's Aborted Foetus Not To Be Given To Police Or Court, Must Be Kept In Forensic Lab & Destroyed After Completion Of Case: Madras HC

Case Title: Kajendran J v Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 282

Noting that there was no standard operating procedure to deal with the products of conception after a Medical Termination of Pregnancy done for a minor pregnant girl, the Madras High Court observed that a guideline needed to be issued and followed across the state.

The bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice Sunder Mohan noted that after a fetus less than 24 weeks old was completely sent to Forensic Science Lab and analysis was done, there was no standard operating procedure available and there was no facility to preserve the product of conception. The court thus made it clear that once the analysis was complete and a report was submitted by the FSL, the sample should be retained by the FSL till the completion of the case and destroyed after that.

The court also emphasized that the samples should not be handed over to the investigation officer and should never reach the hands of the victim girl or her family. With respect to fetus beyond 24 weeks, the court noted that the femur alone was handed over to the FSL, and the rest of the products of conception should be treated as Bio-Medical waste and destroyed as per the procedure.

'ED Action Without Any Basis' : Madras High Court Stops Money Laundering Probe Against Contractors Over Sand Mining

Case Title: K Govindaraj v Union of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 283

The Madras High Court recently restrained the Enforcement Directorate from carrying out its investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act against private contractors in connection with alleged illegal sand mining.

The Court noted that there was no scheduled offence in the present case and hence the PMLA investigation was not sustainable. Till there was a scheduled offence registered and detection of the proceeds of crime, the ED cannot carry out its investigation.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan observed that the ED had initiated the proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act without any basis and without identifying any proceeds of crime. It noted that sand mining was not covered under the scheduled offences under the PMLA. The court added that unless a case in the scheduled offence was registered and such an offence generated proceeds of crime, the ED could not have initiated any action. The court further observed that even if ED's materials were to be accepted, it would only show that they have unearthed large-scale illegal mining that generated illegal money.

Peaceful Protests Deepen Reach Of Democracy, Increase Chances Of Its Survival: Madras High Court Allows Protests By BJP In Tirunelveli

Case Title: Kandasamy v The District Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 284

While asking the state to consider a representation by the Bharatiya Janata Party to conduct a protest, the Madras High Court highlighted that the right to expression is an essential part of democracy.

Justice G Jayachandran observed that in a democratic country, every political party had a right to conduct an agitation, and a peaceful protest could deepen a democracy's reach and improve its chances of survival.

“Transfer Certificates Not A Tool For Schools To Collect Arrears Of Fees From Parents”: Madras High Court

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu and Others v All India Private Schools Legal Protection Society

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 285

The Madras High Court has directed the State Government to issue circulars/instructions/orders to all the school administrations across the State, asking them not to insist on the production of a Transfer Certificate by a child seeking admission. The court has also asked the schools to refrain from making unnecessary entries in the TC regarding non-payment or delayed payment of the school fee. The court added that in case of any violation, appropriate action should be initiated under the RTE Act and other relevant laws.

Noting that TC was not a tool for schools to collect arrears of fee from the parents, the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan observed that when an entry regarding arrears of fee is made in the TC, it would stigmatize the child and was a form of mental harassment under Section 17 of the Right to Education Act.

"License Suspended Straightaway Without Issuing Improvement Notice": Madras High Court Stays Suspension Of KFC Operator's License In Thoothukudi

Case Title: Sapphire Foods India Ltd v The Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 286

The Madras High Court has stayed an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department suspending the license of Sapphire Foods India Ltd, operators of the fast-food chain KFC in Thoothukudi.

Justice GR Swaminathan agreed with the petitioners and observed that the order was liable to be dealt with on several grounds. The court noted that as per the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006, the authorities were to first issue an improvement notice and in case of non-compliance, could suspend the license. In the present case, the court noted that the authorities had straightaway suspended the license in the first instance.

Shocking That Lawyer Is Seeking Protection To Run Brothel: Madras HC Asks State Bar Council To Ensure Members Are Enrolled From 'Reputed Institutions'

Case Title: Raja Murrugan v Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 287

Expressing shock over a lawyer seeking protection for running a brothel center, the Madras High Court has asked the state bar council to ensure that members are enrolled only from reputed institutions and restrict the enrolment from unreputed institutions from Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and other states.

Justice B Pugalendhi observed that it was high time the bar council realised that the reputation of advocates was decreasing in the society. The court added that it was unfortunate that the brother service business was being done by a person claiming to be an advocate from the Kanyakumari District which is known for being 100% literate.

Interest Can't Be Demanded When Entire Stamp Duty Paid During Pendency Of Appeal: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Chennai Versus R.Muniyandi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 288

The Madras High Court has held that interest cannot be demanded when the entire amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal.

The bench of Justice R. Vijayakumar has observed that the present appeal has been filed under Section 47-A(10) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Only after orders are passed by the Court will the liability get fastened upon the purchaser to pay interest on the belated payment. The entire amount as demanded by the authorities has been paid even during the pendency of the appeal. The interest cannot be demanded because the belated payment does not arise.

No Prior Sanction Needed To Prosecute Officers Below Rank Of Inspector, Article 14 Cannot Be Applied Against Administrative Hierarchy: Madras HC

Case Title: Karthikeyan and Others v Thangapandian

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 289

The Madras High Court has made it clear that no prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC is needed to prosecute police officers below the rank of Inspector of Police.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar observed that though Article 14 of the Constitution guaranteed the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, it could not be misconstrued to apply against the hierarchies in the administrative aspects.

The court was answering a reference made to it on whether the term “removable by government” could be interpreted in a broad perspective to include police officers from the rank of Constable to Inspector of Police.

The court noted that the legislation, in its wisdom, had restricted the scope and application of the provision with a reasonable differentia. The court added that if the word “any person” in Article 14 of the Constitution was assumed to have exempted and excluded classification and restriction in all enactments, no statute with any reasonable differentia could ever be implemented.

Madras High Court Laments Political Favours Preventing Police From Acting Against Voter Bribery In Elections

Case Title: Arulraj and another v The Inspector of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 290

The Madras High Court recently criticized the police force for not acting appropriately in cases involving bribery during elections. The court remarked that though the police were the only machinery that could act against such offenses, in many cases, the police were taking sides and not prosecuting expecting favors from political parties.

Justice B Pugalendhi further observed that bribing voters during an election was not just an offense against an individual but an offense against society. The court added that such bribing destroys the very basis of democracy. The court also remarked that since the police were not acting against the offenders, people ended up committing subsequent offence.

Foreign Tax Credit Can't Be Denied In Spite Of Accepting Computation: Madras High Court

Case Title: Thejo Engineering Limited Versus The Deputy Director of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 291

The Madras High Court has held that the claim of foreign tax credit cannot be denied in spite of accepting the computation.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, on examining the company tax return and the activity statements, appears prima facie that the petitioner has remitted taxes through the Australian branch. It is clear that foreign tax credit in respect thereof was claimed by the petitioner by filing Form 67 with relevant annexures. On examining the intimation under Section 143(1) and the rectification order, the foreign tax credit was computed by the assessing officer, and the computation tallied with the foreign tax credit claim of the assessee. In spite of accepting the computation of the taxpayer, the tax credit relief was denied.

Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator & Non Service Of Notice :Madras High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award

Case Title: Vipul Kumar Tulsian and anr vs M/s.Sundaram Finance Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 292

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has set aside an arbitral award where the opposite party proceeded with arbitration unilaterally and appointed the Arbitrator without any intimation to the claimants. Further, the claimants neither received notices of hearing nor appeared before the Tribunal, and consequently, the Arbitrator did not afford any opportunity to claimants to contest the matter.

Therefore, the bench held that such an arbitral award was against the public policy of India and violated the principles of natural justice.

Formal Contract Signature Not Required To Enforce Arbitration Clause If Parties Are Ad Idem: Madras High Court

Case Title: Larsen & Toubro Limited vs M/s.Texmo Pipes and Products Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 293

The Madras High Court division bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has held that if it is proved that if it is established that the parties are ad idem, a formal contract signature by the other party is not necessary to enforce the arbitration agreement.

The High Court noted that, to establish an arbitration agreement, there must be mutual consent between the parties. Section 7(4)(b) of the Arbitration Act allows an arbitration agreement to be derived from various forms of communication, including electronic means, as amended by the 2015 Amendment Act. This provision states that even without a formal contract, if parties are found to be ad idem, they cannot avoid liability under the agreement.

The High Court emphasized the importance of the parties' intentions in determining the existence of an arbitration agreement. It held that arbitration is fundamentally consensual and its enforcement relies on the parties' agreement to settle disputes through this mechanism.

Madras HC Revives Breach Of Privilege Notices Issued To CM Stalin & Other MLAs, Says Proceedings Didn't Lapse Merely Due To Change In Govt

Case Title: The Secretary, Tamilnadu Legislative Assembly v P Sivakumar (batch cases)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 294

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside a single judge order that quashed show cause notices issued to current CM MK Stalin and other MLAs from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party on the issue of breach of privilege while displaying gutka sachets inside the Tamil Nadu Legislative assembly in 2017.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan made it clear that issues such as breach of privilege could not be washed away with a new assembly. The court highlighted that such issues should be deliberated for the people's best interest.

Though it was argued that the breach of privilege proceedings lapse with the dissolution of the assembly, the court noted that if such a view was to be accepted, the purpose of granting privileges would become meaningless. The court highlighted that in such situations, the members may end up not taking the privileges seriously thus leading to utter chaos.

RTE Act Extends To Education From Kindergarten To 8th Standard Irrespective Of Child's Age, LKG & UKG Classes Covered Under Scheme: Madras HC

Case Title: Deepak and Another v The Chief Educational Officer and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 295

The Madras High Court recently observed that the LKG and UKG classes would be covered under the Right to Education scheme as the state is regularly reimbursing the expenses incurred by these classes in the schools.

Justice Anita Sumanth noted that the object of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act was to make education available for all children from pre-school till 8^th Standard and the same was paramount while understanding the Act. The court thus stated that the object of providing education would override any other technical concerns.

Madras High Court Grants Bail To Youtuber Felix Jerald In Savukku Shankar Case, Asks Him To Close His YouTube Channel

Case Title: Felix Jerald v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 296

The Madras High Court has granted bail to Youtuber Felix Jerald in a case pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore. The court however asked Jerald to close his YouTube channel “RedPix 24x7” in which the interview with Savukku Shankar was aired.

Justice TV Thamilselvi passed the orders on a petition filed by Jerald. Previously, when Jerald had moved a bail petition with respect to the case registered by the Cyber Police, the court had dismissed the petition noting that Jerald had provided a platform to Shankar for making the alleged defamatory statements.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Former DGP For Allegedly Forwarding Offensive WhatsApp Message About MK Stalin

Case Title: Natraj v Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 297

The Madras High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against R Natraj, former DGP and ex-MLA for allegedly forwarding an offensive message about CM MK Stalin in a WhatsApp Group.

Justice G Jayachandran was inclined to quash the proceedings after Natraj expressed regret for his conduct and informed the court that he was willing to circulate the affidavit filed by him, expressing regret, in the WhatsApp group in which the offensive message was forwarded.

It was alleged that Natraj had forwarded a message in a WhatsApp group consisting of 73 members about a statement purported to have been made by MK Stalin. It was further alleged that the message was forwarded to create enmity and ill-will between the two groups.

1997 Melavalavu Massacre | Madras High Court Asks State To Revoke Remission Of Accused After He Was Accused Of Attacking Man

Case Title: A Manikandan v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 298

The Madras High Court has asked the state authorities to revoke the remission order and restore the conviction and sentence imposed on Sekar, one of the accused in the 1997 Melavalavu Massacre after he was accused of attacking a man.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar noted that though as per Clause 4 and 5 of the Bond Form No. 130 under Rule 341(8) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983 puts a probation period of three years, it could not be assumed that after such period the life convict could indulge in any crime and that the authorities need not bother about the same.

Madras High Court Strikes Down Section 77A Of Registration (Tamil NaduSecond Amendment) Act As Unconstitutional

Case Title: M Kathirvel v The Inspector General of Registration

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 299

The Madras has held that the 2022 Amendment which introduced Section 77A to the Registration Act with respect to Tamil Nadu and gave powers to the District Registrar to cancel an instrument if it was found to be fraudulent or bogus was unconstitutional.

The bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar held that through the amendment, the registering authority was given an unfettered, unguided, and unlimited power which may end up causing irretrievable damage to the real owners of the properties and affect their rights.

Detention Order Can't Be Issued If Driver In Possession Of Valid E-Way Bill In Physical/Electronic Form: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kompress India Private Limited Versus Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 300

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court while quashing the detention order held that if an invoice, bill of supply, delivery challan, or bill of entry and a valid e-way bill in physical or electronic form for verification are available, then action may not be initiated.

The bench of Justice S.Srimathy has observed that the respondent department issued the notice, carried out the inspection on the same day, and also passed the order on the same day. As per the provisions prescribed, the respondents department ought to grant time for seven days to reply. Since the inspection, notice, and orders were passed on the same day, there is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice.

Person Inviting Threat By His Criminal Or Anti-Social Activities Not Entitled To Police Protection: Madras High Court

Case Title: NT Stalin Barathi v The District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 301

While rejecting a man's application for police protection, the Madras High Court recently observed that police protection should be granted only in appropriate cases, and granting police protection to a person who had invited a situation of threat due to his criminal or anti-social activities will be against public morality.

The bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar added that in our country, several journalists had lost their lives for publishing news against corruption and social evils, government officials were murdered while preventing illegal sand mining and theft and people fighting for public cause were targeted. The court added that the state could consider granting police protection to such protection but not to persons who, due to their own conduct, were faced with threat perception.

Madras HC Quashes Loan Condition Seeking Apology From Applicant For Sticking Posters Against Bank, Says It's A Legitimate Mode Of Protest

Case Title: P.Sibiga Dharshini v The District Collector and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 302

The Madras High Court recently quashed a pre-release condition imposed by the Indian Overseas Bank asking a student to give an apology letter for circulating posters against the Bank while sanctioning her education loan.

Justice Murali Shankar noted that the Nationalised Banks could not treat a loan applicant, especially a student as their servant or a person obeying their orders. The court added that even if it was accepted that the student's father was the office bearer of the NGO which had protested against the Bank, it was not a ground for the Bank to seek an apology from the student who had nothing to do with the protest.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Discharge Of Ministers KKSSR Ramachandran & Thangam Thenarasu In Disproportionate Assets Case

Case Title: Suo Motu RC v Additional Superintendent of Police and Suo Motu RC v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 303

The Madras High Court on Wednesday set aside the discharge of Ministers KKSSR Ramachandran and Thangam Thenarasu in disproportionate assets case.

Justice Anand Venkatesh reversed the discharge of the ministers and directed them to appear before the Special Court. Finding that there was prima facie material to proceed with the trial, the court directed the special court to frame charges and proceed with the trial expeditiously on a day-to-day basis.

Calling it one of the worst forms of abuse of process, the court noted that the conduct of the Investigating Officers pointed to a clear nexus between the DVAC and politicians to ensure that criminal prosecutions were short-circuited against the ministers after they came to power. The court added that the statutory power of further investigation had been used for oblique purposes.

Madras High Court Dismisses TN Minister Anitha Radhakrishnan's Plea Challenging PMLA Proceedings By ED

Case Title: Anitha R Radhakrishnan v The Directorate of Enforcement and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 304

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Fisheries Minister challenging the PMLA proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Proceedings against him.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam dismissed Radhakrishnan's plea and asked him to cooperate with the investigating agency to complete the probe in the money laundering case and allow it to file a final report before the special court.

The allegation against the Minister is that while serving as an MLA of Tiruchendur Assembly Constituency and subsequently as a Minister for Housing and Urban Development Department during the period from 2002-2006, he acquired assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of Rs.2,68,24,7555/- in his name, his wife's name, two brothers and three sons. Based on this, the Directorate of Enforcement filed an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) which was sought to be quashed in the present case.

Madras High Court Forbids Deity's "Imprisonment", Says Temple Can't Be Sealed Citing Law & Order Without Allowing Customary Puja

Case Title: G Pandi v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 305

The Madras High Court recently expanded the scope of treating a deity as a juristic personality in law and held that when an idol in a temple is treated as a living person, closing the temple without allowing the customary pujas would amount to the deity's imprisonment. The court observed that no temple could be locked and sealed on the grounds of law and order.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that just like how a devotee has the right to offer worship, the deity also has a right to observance of the customary rituals. The court highlighted that it had to exercise parens patriae jurisdiction whenever the interests of minors, the mentally ill, and idols were at stake and thus, it was the duty of the court to uphold the right of the parties to perform rituals. The court thus made it clear that as long as there was no practice of untouchability or other practices offending the rights of others, a temple could not be closed or shut down indefinitely.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Detention Of Youtuber Savukku Shankar, Says There Was An Element Of Malice In Entire State Action

Case Title: A Kamala v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 306

The Madras High Court on Friday set aside the detention of Youtuber Savukku Shankar under the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam ordered Shankar to be released forthwith if he was not required in any other case. The court observed that the detention order passed by the State was not compliant with the essential requirements for invoking the Preventive Detention Act.

The court noted that there was an element of malice in the action taken by the State. The court observed that the State had moved with a prejudicial view in light of the publications made by Shankar against the Government and its officials.

Madras High Court Directs Production Company 'Studio Green' To Deposit ₹1 Crore Each Before Releasing 'Thangalaan' And 'Kanguva' Movies

Case Title: The Official Assignee v S Arjunlal Sunderdas (Died) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 307

The Madras High Court had directed the production company Studio Green to deposit one crore each before releasing the movies Thangalaan starring Chiyan Vikram and Kanguva starring Suriya.

The bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice CV Karthikeyan made the orders on an execution petition filed by an Official Assignee appointed by the High Court to deal with the estate of realtor and financier Arjunlal Sunderdas after he was declared insolvent. In 2019, the division bench had allowed a petition filed by the Official Assignee directing Studio Green to pay a sum of Rs. 10,35,00,000/- with an interest of 18% p.a.

Madras High Court Imposes Rs 50K Cost On Litigant For "Disruptive Attitude" During PIL Hearing

Case Title: Kannan Swaminathan v Union of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 308

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on a litigant for filing a public interest litigation without any public element.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji noted that the litigant had displayed a disruptive attitude during court proceedings and had no regard for the court's decorum. Even after engaging a counsel, the court observed that the litigant kept arguing parallelly and disrupted the court proceedings. The court thus directed him to deposit Rs. 50K to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

No Bar In Registering Case And Counter Case Arising Out Of Same Incident, IO Must Probe Both Versions According To Standing Orders: Madras HC

Case Title: T Balaji v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 309

The Madras High Court has issued a set of guidelines to all stakeholders for dealing with cases and counter cases.

A full bench of Justice G Jayachandran, Justice M Nirmal Kumar, and Justice N Anand Venkatesh were answering a reference made to it relating to case and counter case and how the courts and investigation agencies were required to handle them.

The question that was referred to the full bench was whether the police were required to mandatorily follow the procedure prescribed in the Police Standing Order 566 while investigating a case and counter case and what was the effect of its non-compliance.

The court observed that there was no legal bar in registering two FIRs in a case and a counter-case arising out of rival versions of the same incident. In such cases, the court added that the investigation officer was required to thoroughly investigate both rival versions keeping in mind the PSO.

Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy | Financial Relief Not 'Reward' For Victims But To Help Dependents: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Challenging ₹10 Lakh Compensation

Case Title: D Kumaresh v The Chief Secretary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 310

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition challenging the payment of Rs 10 Lakh as ex gratia payment to the families of Kallakurichi Hooch tragedy victims.

Justice SS Sundar and Justice N Senthilkumar dismissed the plea after noting that the ex gratia payments were made on humanitarian grounds. The court noted that the relief was to reward the victims but to help the dependents of the victims who had lost their breadwinners and were struggling economically.

The court further held that the petition was filed without collecting much information challenging a relief package that was paid to ensure the survival of the victim's family with dignity. The court was thus not inclined to entertain the plea, which was challenging the policy decision of the government.

Madras High Court Quashes Case Against AIADMK Leader C Ve Shanmugam For Comments Against MK Stalin, Other DMK Ministers

Case Title: C. Ve Shanmugam v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 311

The Madras High Court has quashed a case registered against AIADMK MP C.Ve Shanmugam for his comments against CM MK Stalin and other leaders while participating in a hunger strike.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that the alleged comments made by Shanmugam did not cause any disturbance to the harmony nor affected the public tranquillity. The court also noted that the complaints were filed 40 days after the alleged speeches were made which itself would show that no untoward incident was reported due to the alleged speech. The court observed that though the utterances were unparliamentary, it would not attract the offences alleged against Shanmugam.

Madras High Court Allows BJP's Bike Rally For Independence Day, Asks DGP To Not Prohibit Rallies Carrying National Flags With Dignity

Case Title: A Krishna Prasath v The Director General of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 312

The Madras High Court on Wednesday allowed the Bharatiya Janata Party to conduct a bike rally in Coimbatore carrying the National Flag, as part of the Independence Day Celebrations.

Justice G Jayachandran allowed the petition filed by A Krishna Prasath, District Secretary of the BJP- Yuva Morcha, Coimbatore District.

The court did not find "merit" in the apprehensions raised by the State while denying permission for the rally. It also directed the Director General of Police not to prohibit rallies where the participants carried national flags with dignity and were not causing any hindrance to the traffic.

Making Remarks About CM, Pointing Failure To Fulfil Poll Promises Not Obscene Or Causing Enmity: Madras High Court

Case Title: C Ve Shanmugam v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 313

While quashing cases registered against AIADMK MP C VE Shanmugam for his remarks against Chief Minister MK Stalin during a hunger strike condemning the arrest of former Minister Jayakumar, the Madras High Court observed that making remarks about the government and pointing out the failure to fulfil poll promises would not amount to causing enmity between groups.

Justice G Jayachandran held that per the records, it was clear that the state machinery had been misused as a tool by the ruling party to crush the voice of the opposition and thus the cases deserved to be quashed.

Taxpayer Can't Be Mulcted With Unjust Penalty Due To Minor Discrepancy Of PIN Code In GST Registration: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Jindal Pipes Limited Versus The Deputy State Tax Officer (Int)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 314

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has held that the taxpayer cannot be mulcted with an unjust penalty due to a minor discrepancy in the PIN code in the GST registration, and the tax invoices are to be construed as a minor violation of the provisions of the respective GST enactments.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the imposition of a penalty for technical venial breach of the provisions or the minor discrepancy in the variance in the address in the tax invoices and the e-way bill would not justify the penalty under Section 129(5) of the GST enactments.

Right To Practise Law Is A Fundamental Right, Bar Associations Not Empowered To Restrain Lawyers From Appearing Before Any Court: Madras HC

Case Title: V Senthil v The Secretary, Bar Council of TN & Puducherry

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 315

The Madras High Court recently observed that a bar association was not empowered to restrict a lawyer from appearing in court. The court observed that the right to practice law was a fundamental right and such a right could not be taken away by the Bar Association by suspending lawyers.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan further added that an advocate was expected to maintain a cordial relationship with the members of the Bar Association to ensure that the court proceedings are not obstructed.

The court noted that even the Apex Court had observed that boycotts should be used as a last resort by the Bar Association and there could not be continuous boycotts by lawyers affecting the rights of litigants and the justice delivery system.

Fake Doctors Are Menace To Society, Practicing Allopathy After DiplomaIn Indian System Of Medicine Serious Issue: Madras High Court

Case Title: K Amrithalal v The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 316

The Madras High Court has recently observed that persons who practice the Allopathy system of medicine after getting a diploma certificate in other Indian systems of medicine were playing with the lives of innocent people who came to them believing them to be genuine doctors.

Justice Murali Shankar noted that fake doctors were a menace to society and the government was expected to deal with them with iron hands. The court however lamented that instead of taking action, the police remained mute spectators and got themselves satisfied with the imposition of fine.

Don't Want To Open Pandoras Box: Madras High Court Junks Plea To DeclareThirukkural As National Book

Case Title: M Selva Kumar v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 317

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition seeking to declare Thiru Kural as a “National Book with high values and virtues of India” or the “National Literature of virtue with Ethics of India”.

Thirukural, written by Saint Thiruvalluvar, is a Tamil language text containing short couplets that deal with teachings on virtue, wealth, and love among other social and political issues.

Dismissing a petition filed by one Selva Kumar, the Madurai bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice Victoria Gowri said that the declaration was a policy decision, to be taken by the concerned government and was not within the domain of the court. The bench also said that it did not want to open a pandoras box as allowing the prayer would result in a situation where every high court would end up passing orders for declaring a particular text as national book.

ESOP Employee Without Any Contractual Obligation is , Perquisite',Taxable As Salary U/s 17(2) : Madras High Court

Case Title: Nishithkumar Mukeshkumar Mehta vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 318

While pointing out that the payment by FPS was not made towards the ESOPs as the Assessee continues to hold the ESOP (Employee Stock Option Purchase) even after the receipt of the compensation, the Madras High Court held the receipt in hands of Assessee qualifies as perquisite and taxable under the head 'Salaries'.

Hence, the High Court refuses to allow 'Nil' certificate of tax deduction u/s 192 in reference to such compensation, which is to be treated as perquisite in lieu of 'salary'.

Further, Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act provides for the valuation of perquisites for tax purposes, which is equal to the cost which has been incurred by the organization/ employer for/ on behalf of the employee.

Only Gender Centric Offences Excluded From Plea Bargaining: Madras High Court Lays Down Suggestions For Trial Courts

Case Title: Mr G Venkateshan v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 319

The Madras High Court has emphasised that the term “offences against women” which is excluded from plea bargaining would mean only gender-centric or gender-neutral offences and not non-gender offences committed against women.

Justice G Jayachandran also laid down suggestions which the trial courts could look into while dealing with applications for plea bargaining.

The court suggested that the trial courts could inform the accused about his right to invoke plea bargaining soon after the framing charges, thus allowing the accused to exercise his right before the expiry of 30 days from the date of framing charges as prescribed under Section 290 of BNSS.

Nullity Of Marriage Doesn't Bar Wife From Claiming Maintenance: Madras High Court

Case Title: Sathiyamurthy v Arputha Mary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 320

While refusing to interfere with an order granting maintenance to the wife, the Madras High Court said that it was a settled position that even if a marriage was declared null by a competent court, it would not bar the wife from claiming maintenance.

Justice G Ilangovan was hearing a plea by a husband to recall an earlier order of the High Court fixing maintenance of Rs5000/- to his wife. The court observed that if the husband had any grievance over the order, he should have taken recourse through proper proceedings. The court, thus denied to interfere with the order stating that the petition filed without following the procedure was not maintainable.

Grindr App Used To Commit Offence: Madras High Court Asks Centre To Take Appropriate Action Against App Including Blocking

Case Title: Maharaja v Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 321

The Madras High Court recently observed that the popular gay dating app, Grindr was being used for illegal activities. The court was hearing a bail petition of a man who was accused of sexually abusing and robbing another man through the app. The court thus suggested the Investigating officer to report to the Ministry of Electronic & Information Technology so that it could take appropriate action including blocking the app as per with law.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy remarked that the app was illegal not because it dealt with homosexual persons, but it served only a prurient purpose and the sexual interest of the parties.

Commercial Tax Officer Not Obligated To Physically Verify E-Way Bills: Madras High Court

Case Title: S.Doctor Viswanathan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 322

The Madras High Court has quashed the suspension order of a commercial tax officer who issued refunds to fake exporters without verification.

The bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh has observed that, as a quasi-judicial authority, if the petitioner has fulfilled all the requirements that are provided under the relevant Act and the circular, that by itself is sufficient compliance before passing the order of refund of the tax. If, for any reason, it ultimately turns out to be a fake export by a fraudster, the order passed by the petitioner by itself cannot result in the suspension of the petitioner. When the petitioner was exercising his quasi-judicial function, unless there was strong prima facie material against the petitioner involving moral turpitude, grave misconduct, etc., suspension must be the last resort.

No IGST Is Payable On Ocean Freight Under Reverse Charge Mechanism; Madras High Court Directs Refund

Case Title: Viterra India Pvt Ltd. Versus The Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 323

The Madras High Court has directed the department to refund the GST paid by the assessee on the ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism.

The bench of Justice Mohammed Shaffiq has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohit Minerals Private Limited, in which it was held that no IGST is payable on ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism for cost, insurance, and freight (CIF) imports.

Madras High Court Permits Hindu Munnani To Hold Peaceful Demonstrations In Solidarity With Hindus In Bangladesh

Case Title: Siva Vijayan v Home Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 324

The Madras High Court has allowed Hindu Munnani to conduct demonstrations in the state demanding the Central Government to take action against the genocide of Hindus in Bangladesh.

Allowing a petition filed by the organization, Justice G Jayachandran said that when demonstrations could be held in the state to show solidarity with the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the same could be done for the Hindus in Bangladesh. The court also emphasized that the people had a democratic right to hold peaceful demonstrations.

Madras HC Quashes POCSO Case Against Woman Who Alleged Mother & Sister Illegaly Retained Her Daughter's Custody, Orders Child To Be Returned

Case Title: Dharani v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 325

In an unusual order, the Madras High Court has invoked its extraordinary jurisdiction in a habeas corpus case, to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against a woman under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan were hearing an HCP filed by a woman for producing her 5-and-a-half-year-old daughter. The woman had alleged that her elder sister and mother were refusing to hand over the daughter's custody to her.

After granting custody to the woman, the court went a step further and examined the POCSO proceedings initiated against her on the complaint of the sister and the mother. Noting that a scheming attempt had been made by the sister and mother to get custody of the minor child, the court observed that there was not an iota of legally permissible evidence against the woman to proceed under the POCSO Act.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Woman Who Killed Husband For Trying To Sexually Assault Daughter

Case Title: Preetha v Inspector of Police and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 326

The Madrasa High Court recently quashed a criminal case registered against a woman for allegedly killing her husband who tried to sexually assault their 21-year-old daughter in a drunken state.

Justice G Jayachandran noted that on perusing the materials, it was clear that the act was committed under private defence and it was obvious that the woman had committed the alleged offence to save the honour of her daughter.

The court referred to the statement of the daughter along with the photographs and the post-mortem report to conclude that the prosecution under Section 302 of the IPC was erroneous. The court observed that the act was a clear case of private defence which attracted Section 97 of the IPC.

Appointments To Aided Minority Institutions Can't Be Restricted To Any Particular Caste Or Religion: Madras High Court

Case Title: Manohar Thangaraj v Rt.Rev.ARGST Barnabas and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 327

The Madras High Court recently held that while minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions, the appointment in these institutions if aided by the government, could not be limited to a particular religious denomination.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that when the institution was receiving funds from the state exchequer, the principles of secularism demanded that the appointment process be open to all.

The court observed that the right of the institutions to receive grant from the government is coupled with the obligation to appoint competent teachers and this obligation could be discharged only if there is a wide choice of candidates. The court thus held that the appointment of candidates from the diocese list would not be good for the administration.

Retrospective Applicability Of Extended Time Limit For Availing ITC; Madras High Court Quashes Order Not Condoning 1 Day Delay

Case Title: M/s. Ohm Sakthi Blue Metals Versus The Superintendent of GST & Central Excise

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 328

The Madras High Court has quashed the order, not condoning the delay of 1 day, on the ground that the extended time limit for availing input tax credit (ITC) is retrospectively applicable.

The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has observed that the GST Council, in its 53rd meeting, recommended extending the deadline for filing GSTR-3B returns for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21, and the said extension applies retrospectively from July 1, 2017.

The court, while allowing the petition, held that the department refused to condone the delay and also proposed to reverse the ITC under Section 73(1) of the GST Act, which is detrimental to the interest of the petitioner and is hence liable to be set aside.

Delay In Filing Appeal, Notices Uploaded On GST Portal , Copy Not Served: Madras High Court Condones Delay

Case Title: Tvl.Deepa Traders Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 329

The Madras High Court has condoned the delay of 285 days in filing the appeal on the grounds that the notices were uploaded on the GST portal but no hard copy was served on the assessee.

The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has observed that the delay was not wilful but due to bona fide reasons, and a reasonable cause has been shown by the petitioner for the delay.

“Atrocious Game By State”: Madras High Court Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Cost On State For Filing Frivolous Appeals Over Salary Dispute

Case Title: The State of Tamil Nadu v. SG Pushpalatha Gracelin and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 330

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs.5 lakh on the State of Tamil Nadu for filing appeals against orders directing it to pay salaries to Assistant Professors.

While ordering the exemplary costs, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice L Victoria Gowri said it hoped the order would serve as an example and prevent the State from filing such appeals. The court also called the petitions an “atrocious game” played by the State on its citizens.

The State had appealed against a 2023 order of a single judge directing it to pay the pending salary of Assistant Professors. The court observed that it did not find any reason to interfere with the order of the single judge. The court thus dismissed the appeals with exemplary costs. Out of the costs, the court ordered half the amount to be paid to the CANCARE Foundation.

Leave From Employment For Research Abroad Should Not Be Treated As Break In Service, Must Be Counted For Pension Purposes: Madras High Court

Case Title: R Rakkiyappan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 331

The Madras High Court recently observed that as per the Tamil Nadu Leave Rules 1933, the period of absence from work for employment abroad shall not be treated as a break in service and must be counted for pension and other purposes.

Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that even as per a Government Order issued in this regard, the period of absence during employment abroad should be treated as an extraordinary leave and should not be considered a break in service but one without allowance.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Rakkiyappan who had approached the court after his leave period was not counted for pension, other terminal benefits, annual benefits and for Carrier Advancement Scheme (CAS).

“Temple Prasad Key Element Of Worship”: Madras High Court Asks HR&CE Dept To Consider Preparing Prasadam On Its Own Without Commercialising

Case Title: CS Vaidyanathan v The Commissioner, HR & CE Department

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 332

The Madras High Court recently observed that temple prasadam is a key element in worship which gives immense satisfaction to the devotees and thus the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment department should consider preparing and distributing the prasadam on its own without leasing it to commercial operators or other individuals.

Justice B Pugalendhi also remarked that the Prasadam is a blessing of the deity and it is the duty of the temple administration to ensure the quality of the Prasadam provided in the temple. The court thus wondered how the department would ensure the quality of the Prasadam when its production and supply were leased out to private individuals.

Noting that temple was not a place for commercial activities, the court examined the income generated by leasing out the Prasadam stalls to private individuals and the income generated when the Prasadam is prepared and provided by the temple itself. The court noted that temples could generate higher income through Prasadam stalls by preparing it in the temple itself.

Madras High Court Declines To Stall Formula 4 Street Race To Be Held In Chennai From August 31st To September 1st

Case Title: ANS Prasad v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 333

The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to stall the Formula 4 Street Race that is scheduled to be held in Chennai on August 31^st and September 1^st, 2024.

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji allowed the race to be conducted subject to obtaining a license from the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) which was to be obtained on or before noon on 31st August. The court also made it clear that if the license was not obtained within the stipulated time, the event could not be conducted.

The bench passed the interim orders after considering the affidavit filed by the Chennai City Traffic Police assuring that the free flow of traffic would not be affected and that there wouldn't be any hindrance in accessing the Government Hospital. The court had previously dismissed a batch of pleas challenging the conduct of the Formula 4 race in 2023. The event was however postponed following Cyclone Michaung which hit Tamil Nadu in December 2023.

Administrative Delays Insufficient To Justify 950-Day Delay In Section 34 Appeal Under Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Project Director, National Highways Vs. R.KaThe Project Director, National Highways No.45E & 220, National Highways Authority of India vs M.Mallika Begam and anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 334

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Sunder Mohan has held that the administrative reason alone cannot be a reason for condoning the delay of 950 days in filing an appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The bench held that delays attributable to administrative factors, such as changes in project management or internal procedural adjustments, do not constitute valid grounds for extending the limitation period for filing an appeal.

Brought Disrepute To Legal Profession: Madras High Court Calls For Action Against Lawyer Who Forged Rental Documents

Case Title: BL Madhavan v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 335

The Madras High Court has called for action against a lawyer who misused his position and forged rental agreements. The court observed that the lawyer was liable to be prosecuted for misconduct under the Advocates Act 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules 1975.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam held that lawyers enjoy a status in society and are expected to maintain good conduct. In the present case, the court noted that the lawyer had abused his position which would cause disrepute to the legal profession.

Muslim Wife Who Files For Divorce Is Entitled To Claim Interim Maintenance U/S 151 CPC: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 336

The Madras High Court has ordered that courts have power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to grant interim maintenance to a Muslim woman who has filed for divorce under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan noted that though the Act does not have a provision for granting interim maintenance, the court cannot shut its eyes when the wife comes to the court saying that she has no means. The court added that the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act was introduced to ameliorate the status of Muslim women and thus had to be given a purposive interpretation.

Senthil Balaji Withdraws Revision Plea Against Trial Court's Refusal To Discharge Him From PMLA Proceedings

Case Title: V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 337

Former Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji who has been in ED custody since June 2023 in connection with a cash-for-job money laundering case has withdrawn a revision petition filed by him challenging the decision of the Special Judge refusing to discharge him from the proceedings.

Balaji's counsel told the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam that since the trial in the PMLA case has already begun and the witness examination has already started, he wished to withdraw the revision petition. The court noted the submission and dismissed the case as withdrawn.

Sexual Harassment In Sports: Madras High Court Directs State To Take Measures To Protect Athletes, Take Prompt Action Against Perpetrators

Case Title: Tamil Selvan v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 338

While refusing to set aside the conviction of a sports teacher who was convicted for harassing a 12^th Standard student during a State-level match, the Madras High Court remarked that the right to enjoy a safe and supportive sports environment is a fundamental right of every female sports person.

Justice KK Ramakrishnan noted that as per a report published by the Ungender titled 'Sexual Harassment in Sports in India', sexual harassment was at an all-time high. The court noted that perpetrators of such crimes had to be suitably dealt with. Noting that a prompt law to deal with such issues was required, the court issued directions to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu to address the issue of protection of women participants in sports from sexual harassment in the interest of sports education and transparent participation of women in sports.

The court also directed the State Government to permit either parents or guardians of the girl participating in state competition to accompany them at state cost to prevent harassment.

Madras High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje After State Govt Accepts Her Apology

Case Title: Shobha Karandlaje v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 339

The Madras High Court on Thursday quashed the FIR registered against Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje for her remarks linking Rameshwaram Café bombers to the people of Tamil Nadu.

Justice G Jayachandran allowed Karandlaje's petition after Advocate General PS Raman informed the court that considering Karandlaje's profound apology, the state has taken a policy decision to not pursue the matter further.

Ordinary Leave For Prisoners: Courts Shouldn't Entertain Premature Pleas, Must Allow Competent Authority To Exercise Power: Madras High Court

Case Title: Usha v The Director General of Police and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 340

The Madras High Court has remarked against High Courts entertaining premature petitions for ordinary leave of prisoners. The court noted that the competent authorities must be allowed to take a decision by following due procedure as per the statutory time limit provided under the Act.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice N Senthilkumar also observed that the authorities were duty-bound to follow the time limits stipulated in the rules and process the applications for ordinary leave. The court added that any lapse, on the part of the authorities, must be viewed as a dereliction of duty and disciplinary action should be initiated against the concerned officer. The court stressed that the prison authorities should protect the rights of the prisoners.

Ruling Party Cannot Assume That Any Expression Or Opinion About Govt's Functioning Amounts To Promoting Enmity: Madras High Court

Case Title: Thirumurugan v The State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 341

The Madras High Court recently observed that whenever opinions are expressed about the functioning of the Government, the members of the ruling party could not assume that the same would amount to promoting enmity.

Justice G Jayachandran added that the police should be responsible while registering FIR in such cases and must proceed with registering FIR only upon getting a proper legal opinion.

Madras High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To NTK Functionary, Says 'Virtual Warriors' Must Be Careful Before Responding Online

Case Title: Durai Murugan @ Sattai Durai Murugan v The Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 342

The Madras High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to Naam Tamilar Katchi functionary Durai Murugan @ Sattai Durai Murugan. Murugan had approached the court apprehending arrest in a crime booked after his party members made objectionable comments on a post made by a police officer criticising Murugan's speech.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was inclined to grant anticipatory bail as Murgan had not personally made any comments. Thus, the court granted him bail on some conditions. It however criticised the remarks made by Murugan's party men calling it unparliamentary, sexually coloured and vilifying. The court added that before responding online, people should be cautious and ask themselves if the response was necessary.

Tax Concession Can't Be Denied Based On Vehicle Registered In The Name Of Trust And Not School: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Bala Bhavan Educational Trust v. Regional Transport Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 343

The Madras High Court stated that the Tax Concession cannot be denied just because the vehicle is registered in the name of Trust and not school.

The Bench consists of Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan observed that “the Regional Transport Officer, Chennai failed to see the objects of the assessee/petitioner Trust, it is an educational Trust. That apart, the Regional Transport Officer made demand with retrospective effect. The permits of the assessee/petitioner buses were already renewed under the caption of Educational Institution Bus.”

Will Remove Unauthorised 'No Parking' Signs Put Up By Private Building Owners In Public Roads: TN Govt Informs Madras High Court

Case Title: CS Nandhakumar v The Commissioner of Police (Traffic Wing) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 344

The Tamil Nadu government has informed the Madras High Court that it would take action to remove all unauthorized and illegal no-parking signs, mud bags, and no parking barricades put up by private building owners in public roads.

The submissions were made before a bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation seeking government action to remove such illegal sign boards. The petitioner had also sought for publications through print and visual media to remove the encroachments.

The AAG assured the court that necessary instructions would be issued by the Commissioner to the officials concerned for issuing necessary guidelines and directions in the official website within two weeks.

The court then asked the AAG to also indicate in the guidelines that penal consequences would be taken against those occupying public places without any authority. Recording the State's submission, the court disposed the plea.

Red Tapism Must Be Combated: Madras High Court Asks State To Create Centralised Portal For Applying, Issuing Community Certificates

Case Title: V Mahalakshmi v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 345

The Madras High Court has asked the State Government to create a common centralized portal for applying for community certificates, verifying the communal status, and issuing community certificates. The court observed that there was a need for simplifying the whole process so that citizens have easy access to the facilities.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji observed that through the centralized system, an applicant should be able to apply to the authority concerned in the district he/she resides in without relegating to the native district. The court added that the system could also introduce a provision enabling the authorities to verify the communal status of the applicant based on their family's communal status who resides in the district even if the applicant is not living in that district.

The court added that a time limit should also be fixed to conclude the entire procedure so that no unnecessary delay is caused and the applicant is able to be given access to educational and employment opportunities.

“Unpardonable, Inexcusable”: Madras HC Imposes ₹50K Cost On State For Appealing Against Compensation For Death Of Child In Sri Lankan Refugee Camp

Case Title: The Principal Secretary v Athipathi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 346

The Madras High Court recently dismissed an appeal filed by the State of Tamil Nadu against an order directing the state to pay Rs 5,00,000 as compensation to the family of a child who died in the Srilankan Refugee camp.

Calling the state action “unpardonable and inexcusable”, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice Victoria Gowri dismissed the appeal and imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the state to be paid to the victim child's family within two weeks.

The court also remarked that when the state government could pay Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation to the dependants of persons who died by consuming illicit liquor, they should not have challenged the order to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 for the child who died due to the collapse of a poorly constructed and poorly maintained wall.

Madras High Court Sets Aside Order Passed Against A Dead Person

Case Title: M/s. S. R. Steels v. The Deputy State Tax Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 347

The Madras High Court sets aside an order passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer against a dead person.

The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “the impugned order was passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer/respondent against a dead person, who was passed away on 21.11.2019. In such case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.”

The bench stated that it appears that the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 was passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer against a dead person, who was passed away on 21.11.2019. In such case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

Further, since the assessee/petitioner is the only legal heir of the deceased, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the assessee to establish his case on merits, added the bench.

[PMLA] Quashing FIR On Technical Grounds In Predicate Offence Would Not Lead To Automatic Quashing Of ECIR: Madras High Court

Case Title: Vijayraj Surana v Assistant Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 348

The Madras High Court has ruled that when an FIR in the predicate offense is quashed on technical grounds, it will not lead to an automatic quashing of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR).

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam ruled that the judgments in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary cannot have a blanket application and shall be applied depending on the facts of each case. The court observed that when the FIR is quashed on mere technicalities or procedural irregularities, the ECIR would not be automatically quashed.

The court observed that when the courts are dealing with applications to quash the ECIR, it should look into the grounds on which the FIR concerning the scheduled offense is quashed and after careful examination, if it is found that the FIR was quashed on substantive grounds such as absence of prima facie offense, the ECIR would also lose its significance and could be quashed. The court added that if, on careful examination, the court finds that the FIR was quashed purely on technical grounds or procedural irregularities, then the PMLA proceedings would not end.

Police Cannot Order Freezing Of Bank Account Without Quantifying Amount Involved In Financial Fraud, Violates Right To Trade: Madras HC

Case Title: Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349

The Madras High Court has recently ruled that the investigating agency cannot order freezing the entire bank account of a person involved in a financial fraud without quantifying the amount involved in the fraud.

Justice G Jayachandran ruled that such orders freezing the entire amount would be construed as a violation of the fundamental right of trade and business as well as a violation of livelihood. The court added that though the statute empowers investigation agencies to request banks to freeze accounts, it was a looming question whether this power was being exercised properly.

The court added that the freezing of accounts was an issue faced by many citizens of the country and the citizens were often taken by surprise by orders of freezing their accounts. The court added that in many cases, by the time the account holders come to know of the purpose for which their accounts are frozen, enough damage would have been caused to their financial life since their business itself gets affected by the unilateral orders.

[MSMED Act] Statutory Authority Can Only Entertain Dispute If Supplier Was Registered Under The Act During Relevant Period: Madras HC

Case Title: Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Avant Garde Healthcare and Engg Solutions Pvt Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

The Madras High Court recently ruled that the statutory authority under the Micro, Small, Medium, Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would have jurisdiction to entertain disputes only when the supplier had been registered under the Act at the relevant point of time.

Justice K Kumaresh Babu thus allowed an application filed by Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd to waive off the requirement to pay 75% pre-deposit amount under Section 19 of the Act.

PMLA Accused Need Not Be Produced Before Special Court Within 24 HoursIf Arrested From Judicial Custody: Madras High Court

Case Title: Jaffer Sadiq v The Assistant Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 351

The Madras High Court recently dismissed the petition filed by former DMK functionary Jaffer Sadiq challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a PMLA case.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that requirements under the Act had been met when Sadiq, who was already in judicial custody, was formally arrested. Thus, the court said that the petition was devoid of merits and dismissed the same.

Madras High Court Directs Tamil Nadu Veterinary And Animal Sciences University To Not Reject Candidate's Application For Being Transgender

Case Title: A.Nivetha v The Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

The Madras High Court has recently directed the Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University not to reject a candidate's application on the grounds of being transgender.

Justice M Dhandapani was hearing a petition filed by A Nivetha challenging the prospectus issued by the University for admission to undergraduate degree programs. Nivetha had sought to quash the prospectus as being illegal as it did not categorize transgenders as a special category.

Nivetha had applied for the course of Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry on June 26, 2024 which was received by the university. However, on noting that the admission notification issued by the University had no clauses regarding the admission of transgender persons, Nivetha approached the High Court.

Letter Given To Police Officer Admitting Guilt Hit by Section 25 Of Evidence Act, Not Admissible As Evidence: Madras High Court

Case Title: R Lalithsharma v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 353

The Madras High Court has recently set aside an order of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, which had allowed a petition filed by the prosecution to receive two documents as additional documents, one of which was a letter admitting guilt given to the police.

Justice Nirmal Kumar noted that any letter given to a police officer admitting guilt is hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. The court observed that in the present case, though it was said by the prosecution, it appeared that the letters were brought in only to fill up the lacuna in the prosecution, which could not be allowed.

Money Laundering Includes Every Activity Dealing With Proceeds Of Crime,Not Limited To Final Act Of Integrating Money Into Economy: Madras HC

Case Title: Pallab Sinha and another v The Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 354

The Madras High Court recently observed that Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had wider reach and that money laundering would include any activity or process of dealing with proceeds of crime, either directly or indirectly. The court made it clear that the offence was not limited to the final act of integrating tainted money into the economy.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the wording of Section 3 should not be read conjunctively merely because the definition uses the word 'and'. The court added that if such an interpretation was accepted, the whole Section would be rendered less effective as one person would possess the proceeds of crime and another would project it as tainted money so that neither would be covered under the Act. The court thus observed that PMLA could be invoked against a person, who was no longer in possession and enjoyment of proceeds of crime.

Appeal Can't Be Rejected For Failure To Upload Documents On GST Portal Due To Technical Errors: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 355

The Madras High Court stated that an appeal cannot be rejected solely due to the failure to upload documents on the GST portal if the delay or failure is due to technical errors on the portal.

The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “….an appeal should not be rejected without affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, particularly when the rejection arises from technical issues beyond their control.”

No Clinching Material To Show Exact Birth Date Of Thiruvalluvar: Madras High Court Declines To Interfere With Govt Holiday

Case Title: Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the policy of the Government of Tamil Nadu celebrating the birthday of Thiruvalluvar on the 2nd day of Thai which was also declared a public holiday. The petitioner had sought to celebrate Thiruvalluvar's birthday on the Tamil star “Anusham” in the Tamil Month of “Vaikasi”.

Justice M Dhandapani said that since there was no evidence to know the exact birth date of Thiruvalluvar, the court could not issue such directions to the State.

The court agreed with the State's submission that the government policy was only to celebrate Thiruvalluvar and his greatness and nowhere the State mentioned that the day was to be celebrated as the birthday of Thiruvalluvar.

In Absence Of Defendant's Written Request, Trial Courts Cannot On Its Own Extend Time For Filing Written Statement After 30 Days: Madras High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Flowers Private Limited v. Mr.Sumit Srimal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 357

The Madras High Court has observed that the trial courts should not, on its own, extend the time for filing written statements after the expiry of 30 days. The court said that the courts could extend the time only at the request of the defendant which was made in writing containing reasons. The court added that condoning delay on its own would be contrary to Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC

Justice GR Swaminathan also noted that the orders condoning delay for filing written statements should not be passed mechanically and must contain the reasons. The court added that while condoning delay was discretionary, it was mandatory for the courts to record reasons in the order. The court also said that the trial courts could consider awarding costs while condoning the delay.

Madras High Court Junks Plea Seeking Special Benches For Hearing Cases Against Public Spirited Persons, Journalists & Youtubers

Case Title: S.Muralidharan v Madras High Court and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

The Madras High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the constitution of special benches for hearing cases related to public-spirited persons, journalists, and YouTubers.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji said that no person had a right to invoke the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to constitute a special bench. The court added that the petitioner's grievance could not be redressed by way of a public interest litigation.

The court also observed that various factors had to be considered before establishing a separate bench to deal with particular types of cases. The court noted that while the petitioner sought for a special bench, he had not argued that there was a huge backlog of cases against public-spirited individuals, journalists, or Youtubers and had neither placed any evidence pointing to the pendency of the cases.

Transfer Incidental In Employment: Madras HC Dismisses Plea Challenging TANGEDCO's Orders Transferring Employees To TN Green Energy Corp

Case Title: TNEB Accounts and Executive Staff Union v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 359

The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) Accounts and Executive Staff Union challenging an order of the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) through which company employees were transferred to the newly formed Tamil Nadu Power Generation Corporation Ltd (TNPGCL) and Tamil Nadu Green Energy Corporation Limited (TNGECL).

Justice N Senthilkumar noted that the transfer was made pursuant to a tripartite agreement entered into between the State Government, TNEB, TANTRANSO, TANGEDCO, and the trade unions. The court thus ruled that the trade unions could not challenge the transfer when they were already a part of the tripartite agreement. The court also noted transfer was an incidental part of employment and even assuming that some employees had difficulty with the transfer, it could not be a ground to challenge the transfers.

India Must Honour Bilateral Agreements With US: Madras HC Denies Clearance Certificate To Man Who Supplied Helicopters To Iraq Despite US Sanction

Case Title: Hameed Ibrahim v The Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 360

The Madras High Court recently refused to grant a clearance certificate to a man against whom PMLA proceedings were initiated based on a letter from the US Government.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the Enforcement Directorate had initiated an investigation based on a letter issued by the US Government and the Government of India had to honour the bilateral treaties/agreements with the US Government.

Presumption U/S 90 Of Evidence Act Applies When Will Which Is Over 30 Yrs Old Is Produced From Proper Custody: Madras High Court

Case Title: Marathal (Died) and Another v. Kanniammal (Died) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 361

The Madras High Court recently observed that when a Will, which is more than 30 years old, is produced from proper custody, the presumption under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act would be applicable to such will.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan observed that the Section did not exclude a will. The court added that by the very texture of Section 90, the document that requires execution and attestation like a will is presumed to be duly executed and attested if it is more than 30 years old and produced from proper custody.

The court added that if the will is more than 30 years old and produced from proper custody and it is shown that the attesting witnesses are alive and not produced before the court, it may resort to the presumption under Section 114 illustration (g) instead of one under Section 90. The court added that the presumption under Section 90 or under Section 114 illustration (g) should be guided by the principle governing “may presume” under Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The court also made it clear that the presumption under Section 90 is not wide and is limited to the signature, execution, and attestation of the document. The court added that the presumption does not apply to the contents of the document which would have to be proved like other facts.

'Can't Have Another Trial Before The Registry': Madras HC Directs Family Court To Number Wife's Plea Without Asking For Evidence That Couple Are Hindus

Case Title: R.Gnana Sundari v T.Yesuraj

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 362

The Madras High Court has directed the Family Court in Chennai to number a petition filed by a wife for restitution of conjugal rights without insisting on evidence that she and her husband are Hindus.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan noted that though the husband had filed a divorce petition claiming that the couples were Christians while the wife had filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights claiming that the couple were Hindus, the issue had to be decided by the court at the time of disposal. The court added that if proof is demanded at the time of numbering, it would lead to a trial before the registry and another trial before the court which could not be allowed.

Wife Threatening To Commit Suicide, Filing False Dowry Harassment Case Would Amount To Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 363

Granting divorce to a husband, the Madras High Court recently observed that a wife threatening to commit suicide would amount to cruelty.

Justice S Srimathy noted that in the case, the husband had written letters to his mother, within 8 months of marriage indicating his agony wherein he had stated that the wife was threatening to commit suicide. The court noted that there was an element of mental cruelty present in the case.

The court also noted that the wife had filed false dowry harassment case against the husband and his family which had tarnished the family's image. The court thus noted that the wife had used the false dowry harassment case as a tool to threaten the husband which amounted to cruelty.

'Animals Don't Have Rights But State Instrumentalities Must Ensure Safe Environment': Madras HC Orders Compensation For Cow's Death By Electrocution

Case Title: T.Muthu Irulappa v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 364

The Madras High Court has ordered compensation to a man whose cow died to electrocution after it stepped into a puddle into which electricity had leaked from a nearby transformer.

Justice GR Swaminathan noted that though animals did not have any rights as such, the State had a duty to ensure a safe environment for them. The judge added that courts have a duty to invoke parens patriae jurisdiction to take care of the rights of animals since they were unable to take care of themselves.

The court noted that of late, the natural life span of cows was also cut short due to the consumption of plastic. The court noted that death due to consumption of plastic was different as in such cases, death came gradually and insidiously accompanied by severe pain. The court also noted that the law relating to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was silent on this aspect and time had come to take note of the disturbing reality and remedy the solution. The court said that the municipalities and corporations had a duty to keep the streets litter-free and action should be taken for damages against erring entities.

If DNA Test Reveals Husband Is Not Child's Father, He Need Not Implead Wife's Paramour In Proceedings Under Indian Divorce Act: Madras HC

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 365

The Madras High court recently observed that not impleading wife's alleged paramour as a co-respondent is not fatal to a plea for divorce on the ground of adultery, when the DNA test already proves that the husband is not the father of the child.

Justice P Velmurugan and Justice KK Ramakrishnan observed that once it is proved that the wife was leading an adulterous life, the husband would be entitled to divorce on that ground.

The court noted that the medical evidence and the expert advice clearly showed that the child was not born to the husband. The court also noted that the wife had not disputed the DNA test or the expert report on the DNA test. Thus, the court noted that even though there was no direct evidence, the expert advise would indicate that the wife had illegal intimacy with another man.

Despite Tamil Nadu Being A Better Law Enforcing State, There's An Increasing Trend Of Police Encounters: Madras High Court

Case Title: A. Guruvammal v The Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 366

The Madras High Court today lamented the rising trend of police encounters in the state of Tamil Nadu. The court observed that despite being one of the better law enforcement State, there was an increase in incidents of criminals allegedly attempting to attack police officials and ending up being shot or injured.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that oftentimes, the family, who might have been affected by the criminals would applaud the encounter killings without realizing that the same is fundamentally wrong and retrograde thinking.

The court noted that the issue of appreciation for encounter killings had to be taken seriously as the same points to a lack of faith in the law enforcing agencies in the rule of law, constitutional rights and protection, and the criminal justice system. The court further noted that such an attitude reminisces the colonial past of the police and is an affront to democracy.

The court added that people's belief that instant death is an appropriate punishment that would have a deterrent effect is not true and was only a myth. The court emphasized that the means should be as legal as the end.

Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Which Held Apartment Owners Association Cannot Claim Transfer Fee On Every Resale Of Flat

Case Title: Ankur Grand Owners Association v The District Registrar (Admin)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 367

The Madras High Court has stayed the order of a single judge which had ruled that the flat owners could not charge a transfer fee on every resale of the flat.

The bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji have stayed by 8 weeks the order passed by the single judge. The stay was granted on an appeal filed by the Ankur Grand Owners Association challenging the May 2023 decision of Justice SM Subramaniam.

The single judge had observed that if the association was permitted to collect a transfer fee on every resale of a flat, it would not only result in discrimination but also result in multiple collections of corpus funds on every resale or transfer of property. The court had ruled that in the absence of any statutory provision, the association could not be allowed to levy and collect transfer fees on the purchase of pre-owned flats.

UGC Regulation On Selection Committee For Appointment Of Assistant Professor Not Applicable To Minority Institutions: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Principal & Secretary v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 368

The Madras High Court recently held that the UGC regulations prescribing setting up of a selection committee for the appointment of assistant professor was not applicable to minority institutions.

Justice RN Manjula noted that since the selection committee includes outsiders, giving them the power to select the appointees for the post of Assistant Professors would amount to interfering with the administration of the minority institution. The court added that the administration of the affairs of the institution cannot be given in the hands of outsiders.

The court also observed that mandating the UGC regulation of selection committees to these institutions would interfere with their autonomous status. The court thus noted that the selection of faculties in minority institutions could not be compelled to be made through the selection committee contemplated in the UGC regulations.

State Shouldn't Reject Premature Release Of Convict By Merely Citing "Heinous Crime", Must Give Reasons: Madras High Court

Case Title: Mr.Mani @ Velumani v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

The Madras High Court recently asked the State government to reconsider and recirculate its decision to reject a life convict's pre-mature release.

Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the State had rejected the request of the prisoner by merely stating that he had committed a heinous crime and that he had not served 14 years in prison. Noting that reasons were the lifeline for administrative decisions, the court observed that the government should assign proper reasons in each and every case.

The court observed that under Article 226 of the Constitution, though the court could not test the policy of the State government, the court had to see if the State had exercised its power of discretion in compliance with the rules of natural justice.

Article 21 Extends To Foreign Citizen Facing Trial In India: Madras HC Stays Look Out Circular Against Seychelles Citizen, Permits His Travel

Case Title: Karthik Parthiban v The Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 370

The Madras High Court recently stayed a lookout circular issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation against a Seychelles citizen. The court thus permitted the man to travel to Malaysia.

Justice N Seshasayee noted that when Article 21 of the Constitution extended to non-citizens, it would also include the dignified existence of a foreign national facing a criminal charge in India.

The court also opined that the object of the criminal justice system was only to secure the presence of the accused at the trial and it should not be taken as a license to interfere with the personal life of the accused. The court remarked that the criminal justice system was best administered when the inconvenience to the personal life of the accused was the least.