Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 22 - January 28, 2024

NOMINAL INDEX

R Sasikala Devi v The AAO/ Assistance Secretary and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 33

L Ganapathy v The Assistant Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 34

CA V Venkata Sivakumar v The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 35

R. Ochappan vs. Keerthana, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 36

C Ve. Shanmugam v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 37

State of Tamil Nadu v S Krishnaswamy, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 38

Marlena Ann v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 39

Sujithkumar @ Sonaimuthu v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 40

Vaishnavi Jayakumar v The Chennai Metropolitan Development, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 41

M/s.Tulip Nilgiris Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner of Central Taxes and Central Excise (Appeals), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 42

Sri Guberan Steels Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 43

CR Balasubramanian vs. P Eswaramoorthi [Crl.O.P.No.947 of 2024], 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 44

REPORT

Madras High Court Orders Disbursal Of Life Insurance Amount To Family Despite Policy Holder Defaulting In Premium Payment "Due To Ill-Health"

Case Title: R Sasikala Devi v The AAO/ Assistance Secretary and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 33

The Madras High Court recently directed the SBI Life Insurance Company to settle the claim amounts to the family of a man who had defaulted in paying premiums on account of hospitalization.

Justice SM Subramaniam observed that the default was neither intentional nor wilful and the non-payment was only because the insured was hospitalized and taking treatment and had passed away subsequently.

Ram Mandir Pran Pratishta | Singing Ram Bhajans, Uttering 'Rama Nama' Not Prohibited But Be Done Without Disturbing Law & Order: Madras HC

Case Title: L Ganapathy v The Assistant Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 34

The Madras High Court on Monday disposed of a plea challenging the rejection of permission to live telecast the Ram Mandir inauguration programs in a private hall.

Justice Anand Venkatesh held a special sitting in the early hours of Monday to hear the matter. The court took note of the State's submission that there was no prohibition against conduct of functions, singing Bhajans, uttering Rama Nama and Annadhanams on account of the auspicious ceremony. The court however added that the same should be done responsibly to avoid any law and order problem.

The court added that care must be taken to ensure that no misinformation or wrong information was being spread and it should be understood that devotion was for bringing peace and not to disturb the equilibrium of the society.

S.204 IBC | Provision Of Twin Tier Control By IBBI And IPA By Itself Doesn't Give Rise To Presumption Of Double Jeopardy: Madras High Court

Case Title: CA V Venkata Sivakumar v The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 35

While dismissing a challenge made to Section 204 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code which gives powers to the Insolvency Professional Agency (IPA) to monitor the conduct of the Insolvency professional, the Madras High Court recently observed that merely because the provision gave powers to both the Insolvency Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and the IPA, it would not become arbitrary or give a presumption of double jeopardy.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that the conferment of powers to the IBBI and IPA by itself would not amount to conferring unbridled power as the regulation and bye-laws provided for checks and balances. Noting that there was no excessive power being granted, the court added that Section 204 was only an enabling provision and there was no constitutional infirmity in the provision.

Any Person Can File Plea U/S 125 CrPC Seeking Maintenance On Behalf Of A Minor: Madras High Court

Case Title - R. Ochappan vs. Keerthana

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 36

The Madras High Court has observed that Section 125 of CrPC does not prohibit any person from filing a maintenance petition on behalf of a minor.

The bench of Justice KK Ramakrishnan opined thus while holding that a married woman is not barred from filing a plea on behalf of her minor brother seeking maintenance from their father.

The Court found justification in the revision court's order to grant maintenance to the minor brother, even though only the married sister had initiated the revision against the dismissal of the maintenance claim concerning her, and no revision had been filed by the minor brother.

Opposition Should Not Be Prevented From Voicing Concerns By Subjecting Them To Criminal Cases But It Should Avoid Abusive Outbursts: Madras HC

Case Title: C Ve. Shanmugam v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 37

Emphasising on the need for a good opposition, the Madras High Court recently observed that for a democracy to operate successfully, it is important to recognise the opposition and give it an institutional form.

Justice Anand Venkatesh also observed that the opposition plays a major role in providing checks and balances in the functioning of the democracy and by making constructive criticisms about the policies of the ruling government, the opposition could make the government accountable to the public and make them work in accordance with the social welfare and public good.

At the same time, the court also cautioned the opposition from using harsh languages to raise criticism. The court remarked that in the name of voicing concerns, the opposition should not have a vituperative outburst as such sharp language would result in maligning the government and could be considered defamatory. The court added that when such languages was used, it would side track the issues raised.

State Vicariously Liable For Inaction: Madras HC Upholds Compensation To Man Injured During Protests Following Late Karunanidhi's Arrest In 2001

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu v S Krishnaswamy

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 38

The Madras High Court recently upheld an order granting compensation to a man who had suffered injuries during a bandh following the arrest of the then-erstwhile Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in 2001.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy held the State responsible along with the political party that had called for the bandh. The court observed that the State was vicariously liable for its inaction during the situation and not taking proper care of the law-and-order situation.

The court noted that the Managing Director of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation had admitted that there were untoward incidents obstructing the operation of vehicles and causing damage to the vehicles on 30^th June, 1^st July and 2^nd July 2001. The court thus opined that when the respondent authorities had already witnessed untoward incidents happening on the 30^th June, they could have taken necessary precautions for the following days.

Madras High Court Directs DMK MLA's Son & Daughter-In-Law To Appear Before Special Court In Case Over Domestic Help's Assault

Case Title: Marlena Ann v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 39

The Madras High Court on Wednesday directed DMK MLA E. Karunanithi's son and daughter-in-law to appear before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chennai (Special Judge for SC/ST cases). The duo have been accused of allegedly beating and verbally abusing their 18-year-old house help, belonging to the scheduled caste community. As per the latest reports, the couple have now been arrested.

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that in view of the amendments made to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, the court could not routinely issue directions. The court was thus not inclined to allow the couple's request to direct the lower court to consider their bail applications on the same day of their surrender.

Victim's Age Not Proved, POCSO Offence Not Established: Madras HC Sets Aside Man's Conviction For Allegedly Raping Neighbour On False Promise To Marry

Case Title: Sujithkumar @ Sonaimuthu v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 40

The Madras High Court recently set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on a man accused of allegedly committing sexual assault on his neighbour on the false promise to marry.

Justice KK Ramakrishnan observed that the prosecution had failed to prove the age of the victim girl to constitute an offence under the Prevention of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Take Steps To Ensure Upcoming Bus Stands Are Disabled Friendly: Madras High Court To CMDA

Case Title: Vaishnavi Jayakumar v The Chennai Metropolitan Development

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 41

The Madras High recently directed the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority to ensure that the upcoming bus terminals in Koothambakkam, Venpakkam, Varadarajapuram and Mamallapuram are constructed by duly complying with the Harmonized Guidelines and Standards for Universal Accessibility in India, 2021.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a plea by disability rights activist Vaishnavi Jayakumar seeking directions to the CMDA to ensure that the newly constructed Kilambakkam Bus Terminus is compliant with the design and standards prescribed in the Harmonised Guidelines.

IGST Refund Claim May Be Made Before Expiry Of 2 Years From Date Of Export Of Goods: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Tulip Nilgiris Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner of Central Taxes and Central Excise (Appeals)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 42

The Madras High Court has held that an IGST refund claim may be made before the expiry of two years from the relevant date. The relevant date is required to be computed from the date of export of the goods concerned by any mode.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that since the refund claim pertains to exports made between July 2017 and November 2017 and the refund application was filed on January 9, 2019, it is clear that the refund application was made within two years from the relevant date.

Assessee Failed To Cure Defects As Documents Were In The Custody Of Central GST Authority: Madras High Court Quashes Assessment Order

Case Title: Sri Guberan Steels Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 43

The Madras High Court has quashed the assessment order and held that the defect was not cured due to the availability of records in the custody of the central GST authority.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that a composite order of assessment was issued with regard to four defects, and the documents on record disclose that the non-availability of records, on account of such documents being in the custody of the Central GST authority, undoubtedly impacted the petitioner's ability to respond to two defects.

S. 148 NI Act | Don't Impose Condition Of Deposit Of Minimum 20% Compensation/ Fine Amount 'Mechanically': Madras HC To District Courts

Case title - CR Balasubramanian vs. P Eswaramoorthi [Crl.O.P.No.947 of 2024]

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 44

The Madras High Court has directed the District Courts across the State of Tamil Nadu to not mechanically impose a condition of deposit of 20% of the compensation amount/cheque amount u/s.148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

For context, in an appeal against conviction for dishonour of cheque under Section 138 NI Act, the appellate court, as per Section 148 NI Act, has the power to grant suspension of sentence pending appeal with imposition of a condition for payment of a minimum 20% of compensation/fine amount as ordered by the trial court.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

When Parliamentary Proceedings Are Telecast Live, Why Not Legislative Assembly Proceedings? Madras HC Asks State To Consider Live Broadcast With Short Lag

Case Title: Vijaykant v The Secretary

Case No: WP 37424 of 2015

The Madras High Court, on Tuesday, asked the State Government to consider telecasting the legislative assembly proceedings with a time lag allowing the speaker to expunge the unparliamentary or objectionable content.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing writ petitions filed by Late Vijaykanth leader of Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam, D Jagadheeswaran State president of Lok Satta Party and SP Velumani chief whip of AIADMK party seeking live telecast of the TN Assembly elections.

Not Familiar With Hindi, So Will Call IPC As IPC Only Even If It's Replaced With New Law : Madras High Court Judge

Justice Anand Venkatesh of Madras High Court recently told lawyers in his court that he would continue to call IPC, CrPC, and the Evidence Act by their original names even after they were replaced with the new acts which had Hindi names, The Hindu reported.

The court was hearing a case relating to the limitation period prescribed under Section 468 of CrPC. During the discussion, the lawyers present in the court informed the court about the various amendments brought into the CrPC with the new Act. When the judge found the Additional Public Prosecutor struggling to pronounce the Hindi words of the new Act, the judge in a lighter vein said that he would refer to the new acts by their old name as he was not familiar with the language.