Madras High Court Monthly Digest - August 2022 [Citations 326 to 375]

NOMINAL INDEX

S.Bhanupriya v. The State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 326

P.Arumugam v. The Deputy Inspector General of Police and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 327

P.Ranganathan and another v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 328

Vasmi Sudarshini v. The Sub Registrar, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 329

P.Ganesan v. M.Revathy Prema Rubarani, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 330

S.Pongulali v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 331

Subburaj and another v. State and another , 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 332

Jayalakshmi v. The Managing Director (TASMAC) and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 333

The District Collector v. Mr R Vetri and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 334

Dr. Lakshmi v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 335

KL Prabakar v. The State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 336

Azhagan @ Prabhu v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 337

White Cliffs Hair Studio Private Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 338

Karthika Agencies Export House v. The Commissioner of Police and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 339

C Jagadeesan v. Additional Director General of Police and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 340

Kannan v. State rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 341

J Thennarasu v. Anita Nalliah (and other connected cases), 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 342

Aravinth and others v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 343

Natchal vs. V Chokkalingam, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 344

R.Silambarasan v. Chief Secretary and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 345

M/s. Chennai Water Desalination Ltd. versus Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB), 2022 Livelaw (Mad) 346

TJ Gnanavel and another v. The State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 347

A. Viswanathan v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 348

P Mihiran v. The Managing Director (TASMAC) and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 349

V. Sounthar v. The District Collector, Erode District, Erode and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

The Principal General Manager, BSNL and another v. The Administrator, ISHA Foundation, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 351

V Anusha v. B Krishnan, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

Arul Daniel and others v. Suganya, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 353

M Raja v. Superintendent of Police, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 354

O Paneerselvam v. AIADMK and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 355

Pastor V. Mariya Arockiam v. The District Collector and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

S Sasikumar v. The Vice Chancellor and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 357

Vinith Baid v. Union of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

K Muthu v. The State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 359

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan v. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Medical Council and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 360

Sathish v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 361

M/s. United Nilgiri Tea Estates Company Ltd. Versus The Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 362

Praveen Rajesh v. Commissioner of Police and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 363

All India Adi Saiva Sivacharyargal Seva Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 364

A Priyanka and others v. The Principal Secretary and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 365

U Manickavel v State and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 366

M/s.Interplex Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 367

Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry v. VK Sethukumar and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 368

Air Corporation Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. versus Registrar of Co-operative Societies, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

Narayanan v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 370

Subramanian P v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 371

M Sekar v. The District Collector and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 372

Sadam Hussain v. State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 373

Kiruthika Jayaraj and others v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 374

M/s Gupta Hair Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 375

REPORTS

1. Hospital's Delay To Shift Patient To Another Hospital For Proper Treatment Amounts To Negligence: Madras HC Awards ₹5 Lakh Compensation

Case Title: S.Bhanupriya v. The State and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 326

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh has ordered lump sum compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to a young mother who was forced to undergo three surgeries due to delay on part of a government hospital to shift her to a better facility, consequently kept away from her newborn baby for nine months.

Since the hospital was a government hospital, the State was vicariously liable to compensate the petitioner. Thus, the court directed the state to pay the compensation to the petitioner.

2. Police Officials Making False Statements Before Criminal Court To Protect Fellow Officer Amounts To "Misconduct": Madras High Court

Case Title: P.Arumugam v. The Deputy Inspector General of Police and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 327

While upholding the disciplinary action against an erring police official, the Madras High Court heavily criticized the manner in which his fellow officials had given false statements before the trial court in the connected criminal case.

Justice SM Subramaniam remarked that police officials making false or incorrect statements before the criminal courts could be construed as "misconduct" under the Government Service Conduct Rules.

3. Buddha Sculpture Found In Temple : Madras High Court Directs Take Over By Archeological Dept, Halts Poojas

Case Title: P.Ranganathan and another v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 328

The Madras High Court recently directed the Archaeological Department to take control of the property of Thalaivetti Muniyappan Temple at Kottai Road, Periyeri Village, Salem District after the Archaeological department confirmed that the idol inside the temple depicted the mahalakshanas of Lord Buddha.

The court also prevented any further pooja from being conducted in the temple. Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that allowing Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (HR&CE) department to continue treating the sculpture as that of Thalaivetti Muniappan would be against the tenets of Buddhism.

4. 'Right To Marry Is A Fundamental Human Right': Madras HC Allows Couple To Solemnize Marriage Virtually

Case Title: Vasmi Sudarshini v. The Sub Registrar

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 329

Coming to the aid of a young couple, the Madras High Court allowed solemnisation of marriage through virtual mode with the groom in USA and bride in India. The court also allowed the bride's plea for getting marriage certificate by observing that she could affix signature in the certificate for both herself and the groom as she had a power of attorney to that effect.

Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madurai bench observed that Section 12 of the Special Marriage Act 1954, gives liberty to the parties to adopt any form of solemnisation of marriage provided that it must be recognised and reasonable and not against public policy.

5. Proceedings Under Domestic Violence Act Civil In Nature, Can Be Transferred To Family Court With Victim's Consent: Madras High Court

Case Title: P.Ganesan v. M.Revathy Prema Rubarani

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 330

The Madras High Court has held that proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, though before a Magistrate, are civil in nature. It observed that the intention of the legislature in enacting the Domestic Violence Act was to ensure civil law remedies to the victims of domestic abuse by adopting criminal procedure.

The court also held that since the legislature had clear intentions while granting special powers to the Magistrate under the Act, the same could not be diluted by transferring the domestic violence proceedings to a civil court or a family court, without the victim's consent.

The bench of Justice M Duraiswamy and Justice Sunder Mohan was answering a reference made by two single judge benches of Justice R Subramanian and Justice K Murali Shankar.

6. [Custodial Death] Madras High Court Directs CB-CID To Charge Erring Police Officials For Murder, Awards ₹5 Lakh Interim Compensation To Family

Case Title: S.Pongulali v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 331

The Madras High Court recently allowed a mother's plea to register a case for the offence of Murder against the police officials allegedly involved in the custodial death of her 22 year old son. It directed the CB-CID to alter the charge against the accused police officials and proceed against them for the offence of murder and file the final report within a period of eight weeks.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that the Police has a responsibility to ensure that a citizen in its custody is not deprived of his right to life, except according to procedure established by law.

7. [Matrimonial Dispute] Entire Family Cannot Be Implicated Based On Omnibus Allegations: Madras High Court

Case Title: Subburaj and another v. State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 332

Criticising the trend of implicating family members in matrimonial cases, the Madras High Court bench of Justice N Satish Kumar observed that in such cases, mere omnibus allegation against the family members could not be the basis for initiating criminal proceedings.

The court also opined that though under Section 482 CrPC, it cannot assume the role of a trial court. However, if it is satisfied that the prosecution has been maliciously instituted, it could go into the materials and find out whether there are materials, which requires a trial.

8. Distance Rule Not Criteria For Permitting TASMAC Shop To Run Near Educational Institution: Madras High Court

Case Title: Jayalakshmi v. The Managing Director (TASMAC) and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 333

The Madras High Court recently upheld the decision to close a TASMAC shop after considering that the proposed area had a College, a De-addiction Centre, and temples in the vicinity.

Justice Nirmal Kumar agreed with an earlier order with respect to the same premises which held that the distance rule cannot be the only criteria for allowing a TASMAC shop to function near a college.

9. Illegality Can't Perpetuate On Mere Technicality, Writ Jurisdiction Can Be Exercised To Nullify Decree Obtained By Fraud On Civil Court: Madras HC

Case Title: The District Collector v. Mr R Vetri and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 334

The Madras High Court recently set aside an order passed by the civil court declaring title in favour of private respondents qua a government land, after observing that the order was obtained by committing fraud on the court.

Justice Anand Venkatesh held that while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can nullify the judgment and decree passed by a competent Civil court if it has been obtained by playing fraud on the Court and such a decree is a nullity and non-est in the eye of law.

10. Passenger May Be Prosecuted For Motor Accident Caused By Drunk Driver: Madras High Court

Case Title: Dr. Lakshmi v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 335

The Madras High Court recently held that a co-passenger in a vehicle involved in motor accident caused by an inebriated driver can be prosecuted for instigation and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 (ii) of IPC.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy held that the co-passengers could not escape liability by merely claiming that they were merely sitting in the passenger seat and were not behind the wheels.

The court noted that the petitioner had committed a "positive act" in opening the door and sitting in the front seat of the car and thus participating in the journey. Whether this positive act would amount to instigating the driver to drive in an inebriated state would depend on the facts of each case. In the present case, the parties were going on a night stroll which would amount to instigation.

11. Madras HC Quashes Advocate's "Motivated" Land Grabbing Complaint, Says Magistrate's Power U/S 156(3) CrPC Must Be Exercised Vigilantly

Case Title: KL Prabakar v. The State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 336

The Madras High Court recently emphasized that directions under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure should not be issued by Magistrates without the application of judicial mind.

Justice N Sathish Kumar also observed that before ordering an investigation of an offence by the police, the Magistrate can, in appropriate cases, verify the truth and veracity of the allegations made. The Magistrate should also ensure that remedies under Section 154(1) and 154(3) of CrPC have been availed. Further, an application under Section 156(3) of CrPC must contain the details of all these applications made before appropriate authorities.

12. Evidence Of The Victim Can Be Taken To Prove Her Age In Absence Of Necessary Documents: Madras High Court

Case Title: Azhagan @ Prabhu v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 337

The Madras High Court recently modified a judgment of conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to one under the IPC after observing that the prosecution had failed to establish the age of the victim at the time of the offence.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy opined that when the prosecution had not produced the Transfer certificate of the victim and when the victim had categorically deposed before the court that her date of birth was 27.07.1995 not making her a minor at the time of the offence, her evidence should be taken as her correct age and therefore altered the charges.

13. Service Of Preparation Of Scalp, Fitment And Maintenance Of Wig- Indivisible Contact: Madras High Court

Case Title: White Cliffs Hair Studio Private Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 338

The Madras High Court has held that the primary activity is the manufacture of the wig, for which the central excise duty is remitted. The fitment of the wig, including the preparation of the scalp and optional maintenance of the wig itself, is incidental to the manufacturing and supply of the wig.

The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Imagic Creative Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The Supreme Court has specifically noted the difference between a composite contract and an indivisible one. A composite contract is one that would involve components of sale and service, whereas an indivisible contract, also involving components of sale and service, is one where the distinction between the two is very fine and difficult to determine.

14. S.102(3) CrPC | Info Regarding Freezing Of Bank Account Must Be Given To Jurisdictional Magistrate: Madras High Court

Case Title: Karthika Agencies Export House v. The Commissioner of Police and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 339

While ordering de-freezing of an account seized pursuant to investigation into a loan fraud, the Madras High Court held that it was an essential requirement of Section 102(3) of CrPC that information of the seizure should be duly reported to the Magistrate.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that in the case on hand, the information regarding the seizure was made after considerable delay. As this necessary procedure of law was not complied with, the court deemed it fit to set aside the order of seizure of the bank account.

15. Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot Be Initiated For Absence When The Period Of Absence Is Regularised By Competent Authority: Madras High Court

Case Title: C Jagadeesan v. Additional Director General of Police and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 340

Coming to the rescue of a dismissed Police Officer, the Madras High Court recently observed that once the competent authority has regularized a period of medical leave, no further disciplinary proceedings for misconduct would sustain.

In the present case, though the petitioner was said to be absent from service for over three years, the court held that the same was condoned by the regularisation of his absence.

A bench of Justice SM Subramaniam held that though normally such a lengthy period of absence was not condoned by the authorities, especially if the Police Personnel is a chronic absentee or habitual absentee, however, once the authorities have accepted the reasons for absence, the misconduct is condoned.

16. [Statutory Bail] Bail Court Has No Jurisdiction To Go Into Merits Of The Case U/S 167(2) CrPC: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kannan v. State rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 341

The Madras High Court recently reiterated that a bail court, while considering an application under Section 167(2) CrPC was not concerned with going into the merits of the case. The court had to consider such an application for default bail by considering whether the statutory period for filing a charge sheet or challan had expires, whether the charge sheet or challan had been filed and whether the accused was prepared to and had furnished bail.

Justice Murali Shankar, while setting aside the decision of the lower court, also criticized the order passed by the Sessions Judge. The court expressed shock over the manner in which the impugned order was passed and the personal liberty of the accused was handled by the Judicial Officer.

17. TN Rent Control | Cross-Examination Not A Right, Discretion Must Ensure "Fairness" In Judicial Proceedings: Madras High Court

Case Title: J Thennarasu v. Anita Nalliah (and other connected cases)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 342

The Madras High Court recently held that cross examination of a party in Rent control proceedings in the state is not a "right" and the Court's discretion to allow or disallow the same must be based on a plane of fairness in judicial proceedings.

Justice N Seshasayee also observed that though the court has been given discretion, the legislative thrust is on adherence to the principles of natural justice. Hence, even if the Rent Court can regulate its own proceeding, the same has to be in conformity with the principles of natural justice.

18. Mere Gathering Of More Than 5 Persons Not "Unlawful Assembly": Madras HC Quashes Case Against Law Students Protesting Against Srilankan Govt

Case Title: Aravinth and others v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 343

The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against 11 law students accused of raising slogans against the Srilankan Government, demanding their "Tamil Ealam issues".

Justice N Satish Kumar observed that the students had democratically raised protest against the inaction of the police and such a gathering could not be held unlawful.

The court also discussed the definition of the term "Unlawful Assembly" and held that the petitioners had not committed any acts that would fall within the meaning of unlawful assembly. That is, they have not shown any criminal force to commit any mischief, crime of any offence or by way of criminal force or tried to take possession of the property or right to use of incorporeal right which is in possession of enjoyment of others or rights.

19. Hormonal Imbalance/ Irregular Menstruation Of Women Cannot Be Considered As Female Impotency: Madras High Court

Case Title: Natchal vs. V Chokkalingam

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 344

The Madras High Court has held that hormonal imbalance or irregular periods would not amount to impotency of a woman and would not mean that she is unfit to have sex.

Justice RN Manjula observed thus while hearing a revision petition against a Family Court's order directing a woman's medical examination on her husband's plea for annulment of marriage citing non-consummation.

The bench held that when the woman herself had admitted the fact of her hormonal imbalance and details of examination by a gynecologist, it was unnecessary to subject her to medical examination.

20. Intended To Blackmail Leaseholders: Madras High Court Dismisses Plea To Stop Construction Of Sand Quarries With 50K Cost

Case Title: R.Silambarasan v. Chief Secretary and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 345

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed to stop the construction of sand quarries at three villages of Nagapattinam District after observing that the same was filed without bonafide.

The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy held that the petitioner, who himself had a criminal track record under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, had failed to ascertain facts regarding the quarry leases granted to the respondents before filing the writ petition.

21. Limitation Is An Aspect Of Public Policy For The Purpose Section 34 Of Arbitration Act : Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Chennai Water Desalination Ltd. versus Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB)

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Mad) 346

The Madras High Court has ruled that limitation is a facet of public policy, and hence, an arbitral award which is incorrect qua limitation is hit by Section 34(2)(b)(ii), read with Clause (ii) of Explanation 1 to Section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).

The Single Bench of Justice M. Sundar held that, in view of the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Voltas Limited versus Rolta India Limited (2014), if the counter claimant before an Arbitral Tribunal has invoked the arbitration clause, then, the date of such invocation would be the relevant date to decide the limitation period for raising the counter claim. Hence, the Court ruled that the view of the Arbitral Tribunal that the counter claim raised by the party was barred by limitation, by referring to the date on which it had filed the counter claim before the Tribunal, was incorrect.

22. 'Jai Bhim' Movie : Madras High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Actor Suriya And Director Gnanavel Over Alleged Hurting Of Vanniyar Sentiments

Case Title: TJ Gnanavel and another v. The State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 347

The Madras High Court on Thursday quashed criminal proceedings against cine actor Suriya and director TJ Gnanavel for allegedly hurting the sentiments of the Vanniyar community in his movie Jai Bhim.

Justice N Sathish Kumar allowed the petition filed by the actor and the director to quash the FIR filed by Velachery Police on a complaint by Advocate K Santhosh, president of Rudra Vanniyar Sena. He had approached the Saidapet Magistrate seeking direction to file an FIR. Subsequently, Surya and Gnanavel were charged under Section 295A of the IPC.

The court opined that though the defacto complainant had alleged that the movie was projected in such a manner to incite violence and hostility on a particular community, no specific instance had been recorded. Further, the entire FIR was only based on inference and presumption of the de facto complainant. The court also noted that mere reference to a name would not mean that the said name related to a particular community.

23. Madras High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging State's Decision To Transfer 1000 Crocodiles To Gujarat

Case Title: A. Viswanathan v. State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 348

The Madras High Court, dismissed a Public Interest Litigation filed by one Viswanathan against the Tamil Nadu Government's decision to shift 1000 crocodiles from Madras Crocodile Bank Trust to Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre (GZRRC) in Gujarat.

The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala dismissed the PIL after considering the fact that the Rehabilitation Centre had the necessary infrastructure. The court pointed out that even experts were satisfied with respect to the infrastructure available at the facility and thus the court did not find any ground to interfere with the decision. There was also photographic evidence that shows the infrastructure available in the facility.

24. Absorption Not In Consonance With Established Rules: Madras HC Confirms TASMAC Order Demoting Supervisor To Salesman

Case Title: P Mihiran v. The Managing Director (TASMAC) and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 349

The Madras High Court recently confirmed the order of the Managing Director of TASMAC to revert an employee from the post of Supervisor to the post of Salesman after observing that his absorption/promotion was not made in accordance to the established rules or principles. The employee had approached the court seeking to quash the order of the Managing Director.

Justice SM Subramaniam observed that the petitioner could not establish any Rule for his absorption and thus was not entitled to such promotion.

25. "Can't Refuse Indians To Celebrate Independence Day": Madras HC Allows Conduct Of 'Rekla' Race As Part Of Independence Day Celebrations

Case title - V. Sounthar v. The District Collector, Erode District, Erode and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

The Madras High Court recently granted permission for conducting Rekla race in connection with the 75th Independence Day Celebration and Aadi Temple Festival in the Bhavani Town of the state's Erode District.

The bench of Justice T. Raja and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu said that since the Rekla race was to be conducted by residents of Erode District as part of the 75th Year Independence Day, therefore, refusing their prayer would send a message that Indians are refused to celebrate even the Independence Day.

26. "Award Patently Erroneous": Madras High Court Orders Fresh Arbitration In BSNL's Claim Against ISHA Foundation

Case Title: The Principal General Manager, BSNL and another v. The Administrator, ISHA Foundation

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 351

The Madras High Court recently gave liberty to state-owned telecom provider BSNL to institute de novo arbitration against the ISHA foundation for its claim related to unpaid dues.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy made the order after observing that the current arbitral award, which was passed without consulting an expert committee and without giving due regard to the evidences, was patently erroneous.

27. Husband Must Be Removed From House If It's The Only Way To Maintain Domestic Peace, Absence Of Alternate Accommodation Not Relevant: Madras HC

Case Title: V Anusha v. B Krishnan

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

While allowing a wife's plea for permanent injunction, the Madras High Court has opined that if removal of the husband from home alone is the only way to ensure domestic peace, the Family Courts should not hesitate to pass such orders.

The bench of Justice RN Manjula observed,

"The protection orders are normally given to ensure the peaceful movement of a woman within her domestic sphere. When a woman fears the presence of her husband and screams, the Courts cannot be indifferent by just directing the husband that he should not harass the wife, but by allowing him to reside in the same house."

28. Whether Proceeding U/S 12 Domestic Violence Act Can Be Challenged Under Article 227 Constitution/ S.482 CrPC? Madras HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench

Case Title: Arul Daniel and others v. Suganya

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 353

A single judge of the Madras High Court recently referred to a larger bench, the question regarding the applicability of provisions of Section 482 CrPC and/or Article 227 of the Constitution for quashing an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act.

Justice N Sathish Kumar was considering a batch of petitions seeking to quash the application filed under Section 12 of the DV Act by invoking the provision under Section 482 CrPC.

29. Govt Itself Permitted Businesses To Run 24x7, Police Cannot Restrict The Time On Their Own: Madras High Court

Case Title: M Raja v. Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 354

While hearing a shop owner's plea to direct the police not to interfere with his business during late night hours, the Madras High Court noted that the Government of Tamil Nadu has already passed orders permitting shops in the State to run 24x7. In such a situation, the police cannot interfere with the business, except in case of any law-and-order situation.

Justice N Satish Kumar observed:

When the Government itself has permitted to run the business for 24x7, the police cannot restrict the time on their own.

Accordingly, the respondents are directed not the interfere with the petitioner's business and they can interfere only in case of any law and order problem arose in the shop.

30. AIADMK Leadership : Madras High Court Orders Status Quo Ante As On June 23, Says No To General Council Meeting Without Joint Consent Of OPS & EPS

Case Title: O Paneerselvam v. AIADMK and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 355

The Madras High Court on Wednesday ordered to conduct a fresh General Council Meeting of the AIADMK party. The court also ordered the status quo ante, as existed on June 23, before the General Council meeting took place on July 11. The court observed that only the coordinator and the joint coordinator had the powers to convene the General Council. Thus the court in effect canceled the General Counsel meeting held on July 11 and as a result the election of Edappadi Palaniswamy as interim General Secretary of the party

The bench of Justice G Jayachandran thus allowed a plea moved by former Tamil Nadu CM O Paneerselvam challenging his expulsion from the party and the General Council meeting of the AIADMK party that was conducted on July 11. Another General Council member P Vairamuthu had also approached the court challenging the General Council meeting.

31. Building Rules Do Not Permit Conversion Of Residential Building Into A Prayer Hall: Madras High Court Rejects Plea Of Man To Convert Residence To Prayer Hall

Case Title: Pastor V. Mariya Arockiam v. The District Collector and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

The Madras High Court has recently held that Rule 6(4) of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Building Rules 1972 mandates prior permission from the District Collector before construction of a building intended for public worship or religious purposes. The court thus dismissed the petition of a man for converting his residential place into a prayer hall after observing that the necessary permission from the authorities was not sought.

Justice R Vijayakumar noted that the building was located in a residential area and that gathering of such large number of people in a residential area would cause nuisance and difficulty to the residents of the locality.

32. Dr. Ambedkar Is The Architect Of Constitution, Install His Portrait In All Govt Law Colleges: Madras High Court

Case Title: S Sasikumar v. The Vice Chancellor and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 357

While dealing with a challenge to the suspension of a law student, the Madras High Court stressed pon the need to install portraits of Dr. BR Ambedkar in Law colleges. Justice GR Swaminathan, therefore, directed the Director of Legal Studies, Chennai to issue a circular mandating the installation of portraits of Dr. Ambedkar in all Government Law Colleges.

33. "She Converted To Islam & Applied For Bangladeshi Citizenship Voluntarily": Madras HC Dismisses Father's Plea Against Daughter Renouncing Indian Citizenship

Case Title: Vinith Baid v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a Father's plea to forbear the Central Government and the Secretary to the Ministry of Home Affairs from registering the declaration of renunciation of Citizenship or granting no objection certificate/certificate of renunciation of citizenship to his daughter.

The Court noted that the duaghter is a major, aged 25 years. Also, from the record of an earlier habeas corpus petition filed by the father, the Court noted that she had converted to Islam and applied for Bangladeshi citizenship voluntarily.

Justice Abdul Quddhose was considering a petition filed by a father who contended that his daughter, who was presently residing in Bangladesh with her husband, was a victim of radicalization, undue influence, coercion, abduction, and captivity violating all her rights and human dignity.

34. Protest Using Animals Would Amount To 'Animal Cruelty': Madras High Court

Case Title: K Muthu v. The State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 359

While dismissing a man's petition seeking permission to conduct a democratic protest using a buffalo, the Madras High Court held that such action would amount to animal cruelty.

The bench of Justice Sathish Kumar observed that keeping the animal at the place from morning to evening cannot be permitted as it would amount to cruelty and would be in violation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960.

35. 'Let Down All Education': Madras HC Upholds Doctor's Suspension For Creating Fake Medical Certificate For Land Grabbing

Case Title: Dr. S. Radhakrishnan v. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Medical Council and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 360

The Madras High Court recently dismissed an appeal filed by a doctor challenging the order of removal of his name from the medical register for a period of two years after observing that he had issued a fake medical certificate for wrongfully gaining property and thus had committed professional misconduct.

The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy opined that the appellant had let down all education imparted on him merely for obtaining land. This would double up the seriousness of his misconduct. The court thus opined that the punishment accorded to him was proportionate

36. Sunday Hearing: Madras High Court Grants Interim Bail To Accused For Observing Rituals Following Father's Demise

Case Title: Sathish v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 361

The Madras High Court conducted a special sitting on Sunday after an urgent petition was filed seeking bail for an incarcerated accused on the ground that his father had died and he, being an only son was to perform the last rites.

Justice G Jayachandran granted an interim bail of 3 days to the Petitioner, subject to his own bond, to enable him to perform post rituals. He has been directed to report and surrender before the authorities on 24th. The police has been directed to escort the Petitioner to his village.

37.Cut/Sized Shade Trees Constitutes "Agricultural Produce", No Sales Tax Applicable: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. United Nilgiri Tea Estates Company Ltd. Versus The Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 362

The Madras High Court bench of Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq has held that the cut and sized shade trees would constitute "agricultural produce" and, therefore, fall outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (TNGST Act, 1959).

The court rejected the claim of the petitioner that the cut/sized Silver Oak/shade tree would constitute "firewood".

38. Magistrate Cannot Act As A "Post Office" & Direct For Registration Of FIR Mechanically, It Affects Individual's Rights: Madras High Court

Case Title: Praveen Rajesh v. Commissioner of Police and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 363

The Madras High Court, while emphasizing that FIR is not an ordinary thing and could affect the rights of the individual, heavily criticised the order of a Magistrate directing registration of FIR against an accused, without due application of mind.

The court also noted that there was a lack of jurisdiction.

39. 'Agamas Will Govern' : Madras High Court Exempts Archakas In Temples Constructed As Per Agamas From TN Govt Rules 2020

Case Title: All India Adi Saiva Sivacharyargal Seva Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 364

In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court on Monday exempted temples constructed as per agamas from the rules brought by the Tamil Nadu Government in 2020 in relation to the qualifications and appointments of archakas/poojaris.

A division bench of the High Court read down Rules 7 and 9 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020 to hold that they will not apply to temples constructed as per agamas.

The High Court said that reading down these Rules are necessary so as to exempt temples constructed as per agamas. Otherwise, it would offend the fundamental rights to practice religion and the rights of a religious denomination to manage its affairs guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The Court however refrained from striking down the said Rules in their entirety, as they dealt with other appointments as well.

40. [NEET] Intake Cannot Be Beyond Sanctioned Limit Or Time Schedule For Completing Admissions: Madras High Court

Case Title: A Priyanka and others v. The Principal Secretary and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 365

In context of admissions to MBBS courses, the Madras High Court has reiterated that admission to the courses had to be commensurate with the annual intake capacity of the institution. The court also highlighted that the admissions cannot be made beyond the time limit fixed by the Apex Court for completing admissions.

The bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose was hearing petitions filed by children of defence personal seeking admission to MBBS Course under the wards of defence personnel quota. The court noted that the GO dated 30.06.1979 was not applicable to the petitioners as the said notification was applicable only to PUC and BSC students which was the stream of education prevalent at that point of time.

41. Madras High Court Orders Complete Abolition Of 'Orderly System' From TN Police In Four Months

Case Title: U Manickavel v State and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 366

The Madras High Court on Tuesday passed final orders in the case against engagement of uniformed Police officers as orderlies at the residence of higher officials in Tamil Nadu.

Justice SM Subramaniam today directed the authorities to ensure that the orderly system is completely abolished within a period of four months. The court also directed the authorities to remove the orderlies appointed in the residence of retired officials as the same amounts to illegality and a violation of the law.

Further, if any complaint/ information was received with respect to misconduct or offence by officials, the authorities were directed to conduct enquiry and initiate all appropriate actions under the relevant laws and under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.

With respect to illegal occupation of the official police quarters, the court directed to initiate steps for eviction in the manner known to law.

42. Timelines For Uploading TRAN-1 For Seeking Credit And Revision Of Credit Cannot Be One: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Interplex Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 367

The Madras High Court has held that the timelines for uploading of TRAN 1 for seeking credit as well as seeking revision of the credit cannot be one and the same as it leads to an unworkable position.

The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that the time limit for revision of a TRAN-1 return be identical to the timeline for filing of a return seeking transition. The purpose of revision is to enable correction or modification of a return of transition. It would stand to reason that some additional time, over and above the timeline granted for a TRAN-1 return, be provided by the respondent in the latter instance.

43. Bonafide Disciplinary Proceedings By Bar Council Have Statutory Indemnity Against Legal Action: Madras High Court

Case Title: Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry v. VK Sethukumar and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 368

The Madras High Court recently emphasized on "statutory indemnity" available to the Bar Councils with respect to bonafide disciplinary proceedings initiated against Advocates.

The court was hearing a criminal revision petition moved by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry against the order of a lower court dismissing the Bar Council's application to reject a plaint filed by an Advocate seeking damages from the Bar Council.

The court noted that since the proceedings before the Bar Council were quasi-judicial, an aggrieved party could make use of the Appeal remedies provided under the Advocates Act. The grounds of appeal shall include all the shortfalls in the order of the lower forum. Thus, when no further appeal is made against the order of the first appellate forum, there cannot be anymore grievances left out.

44. Arbitrator Appointed Under MSCS Act; Fixation Of Fees Is Subject To A&C Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: Air Corporation Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. versus Registrar of Co-operative Societies

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

The Madras High Court has ruled that the power of the Central Registrar to appoint an arbitrator and fix the fees of arbitration under the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 (MSCS Act), is subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).

Holding that there is no provision under the MSCS Act where an exemption has been provided with respect to Section 38 of the A&C Act, which requires the parties to equally bear the advance costs to be deposited before the Arbitral Tribunal, the Single Bench of Justice C. Saravanan set aside the order of the State Registrar directing the petitioner to pay the fees and expenses to the Arbitrator.

45. Madras HC Voices Concern Over Rise In Sexual Exploitation Of Children, Says Recalcitrant Attitude Of Public Must Change, Calls For Social Movement

Case Title: Narayanan v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 370

While confirming the life imprisonment of a man convicted for sexually abusing five children, the Madras High Court emphasized that the mere absence of physical injury does not rule out the sexual acts.

Justice PN Prakash and Justice Hemalatha held sexual activity with a child to be a criminal/ immoral act and emphasizing on making the society safe for children

46. Framing Of Charge | Court Merely Required To Sift Evidence On Record & Form Prima Facie Opinion Regarding Existence Of "Strong Suspicion": Madras HC

Case Title: Subramanian P v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 371

Madras High Court recently dismissed a revision petition moved by a man accused of cheating and forgery after observing that while deciding upon discharge, the High Court only had to sift through the evidence on record and form an opinion on whether there was a prima facie case and a strong suspicion against the accused.

47. "It Is A Paradox That Closure Of Temple Actually Leads To Peace": Madras HC Expresses Anguish Over 'Ego Clashes' Between Worshippers

Case Title: M Sekar v. The District Collector and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 372

While directing the Assistant Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment to appoint a fit person to look into the affairs of the Sri Madurai Veeran, Karupparayan and Kannimar temple at Erode, the Madras High Court expressed concern on how temples were now becoming a cause for disturbance of law and order due to "ego clashes" between worshippers.

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that temples are supposed to bring man closer to god. However presently, the courts were flooded with litigations and the police and revenue authorities were made to spend their lives resolving disputes between disputing parties.

48. Case Based On Suspicion And Confession Statement: Madras High Court Grants Bail To Man Charged Under UAPA

Case Title: Sadam Hussain v. State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 373

The Madras High Court recently granted bail to a man after observing that the entire case against him was based on suspicion and case was taken based on the confession statement. Justice S Vaidyanathan and Justice AD Jagdish Chandira also observed that there was no complaint made against the accused.

The court had also noted that no offence had taken place and no complaint was actually made by Kumaresan. The entire case was merely on the suspicion that arose in the mind of a police officer while doing his routine rounds. The court was therefore convinced that there was no prima facie case against the appellant.

49. [Kallakurichi Student Death] Unfortunate That Teachers Are Being Arrested For Asking Students To Study Well: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kiruthika Jayaraj and others v. State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 374

The Madras High Court recently granted bail to two teachers, school principal, school management correspondent and secretary in connection with the death of a XIIth standard student in Kallakurichi.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that there was no evidence to show that the girl had been tortured before her death. Even going by the suicide note, there was no evidence to implicate the teachers as they had merely asked the student to study well.

50. Exporter Can't Be Deprived Of MEIS Benefits Due To Technical Error In Electronic System: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s Gupta Hair Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 375

The Madras High Court has held that due to technical error or lacunae in the electronic system, the petitioner/exporter cannot be deprived of its benefit/incentive under the Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS).

The single bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has directed the department to consider the petitioner's representation seeking to get the benefit under the MEIS for the subject shipping bill and pass orders within a period of six weeks.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

1. TN Bar Council Bars Advocate Accused In Theft Case From Practice

The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry recently passed a prohibitory order against a lawyer for his alleged involvement in a case of theft. Based on the complaint by Marappan, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry has passed the present resolution prohibiting Balasubramani from practicing as an advocate in all Courts, tribunals, and other authorities in India either in his name or in any assumed name till the disposal of Disciplinary proceedings pending against him.

2. Remarks Against Judiciary : Madras High Court Issues Second Contempt Notice Against Savukku Shankar

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has again issued notice to Youtuber/Commentator for his remarks against the Indian Judiciary in a recent Youtube interview where he made the below remark:

"The entire higher judiciary is riddled with corruption"

When the matter came up before the bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice B Pugalendhi today, the court issued notice to Savukku Shankar as to why proceedings for criminal contempt should not be taken against him.

3. Madras High Court Orders Arrests Of Fake Advocate; Directs Publication Of His Photo In Newspapers To Find Out Clients Cheated By Him

The Madras High Court recently ordered enquiry against a fake advocate. The bench of Justice S Vaidyanathan and Justice AD Jagdish Chandra ordered the Commissioner of Police, Chennai City to conduct depute an officer who shall register a case in accordance with the law, arrest the fake advocate, and conduct a thorough investigation.

The court also directed the investigating officer to widely publish the photograph of the man, both in Tamil and English dailies circulating in the State of Tamil Nadu to find out if any persons have been deceived by him. The Bar Association of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry was also directed to conduct enquiry regarding any pending complaint against the advocate.

ALSO READ: Fake Lawyer Case: Madras HC Directs Bar Council To Verify Advocates' Antecedents Before Permitting Them To Hold Posts In Statutory Committees

4. Private Medical Colleges Move Madras High Court Against NMC Order Stipulating Fees For 50% Seats At Par With Govt

Case Title: Education Promotion Society for India v. Union of India and others

Case No: WP No. 10088 of 2022

A group of Private Medical Colleges, on Monday, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 10 of the National Medical Commission Act 2019 and an office memorandum issued pursuant to the Act by the National Medical Commission directing all private medical colleges to charge a fee equivalent to that charged by the Government in 50% seats of these institutions.

The matter was heard by the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala.

The petitioners challenged the validity of Section 10(1)(i) of the Act and the memorandum issued pursuant to the same contending that the same violated the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to establish and administer educational institutions. They also contended that it would result in cross-subsidizing education as some students will be compelled to pay for the education of others.

ALSO READ: Madras High Court Reserves Order On Plea Challenging Capping Of Fees For 50% Seats In Private Medical Colleges

5. 160 Years Of Madras High Court: Chief Justice Releases Commemorative Stamp

The Madras High Court on Monday, while celebrating the 75th year of Independence, also celebrated 160 years of its existence.

The Madras High Court, said to house the largest number of courtrooms in Asia, was granted a Letters Patent by the Majesty Queen Victoria on 26th June 1862 and formally came into existence on 15th August 1862.

To commemorate 160 years of its establishment, Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari released a commemorative stamp, "Corporate My Stamp", bearing an image of the High court building and its logo which was received by Justice Duraiswamy.

6. Madras High Court Stays IT Dept's Order Imposing ₹1.5 Crore Penalty On Actor Vijay For Undisclosed Income

Case Title: C Joseph Vijay v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others

Case No: WP No. 21006 of 2022

The Madras High Court on Tuesday granted an interim stay on the proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department against Actor Vijay for "admitted" undisclosed income of Rs. 15 crore in the financial year 2015-16.

The bench of Justice Anita Sumanth passed the interim order on an application filed by the actor and directed the Department to file its counter by September 16.

The penalty was imposed based on raids conducted at the actor's residence in September 2015. Vijay alleged that the penalty order was passed after the expiry of limitation period to initiate such action.

7. Plastic Bottles Make Water Poisonous, Harm Environment: Madras High Court Asks Centre To Find Alternatives

Expressing concern over the distribution of water in public places through plastic bottles and bubble top cans, the Madras High Court has directed the Central government to come up with effective alternative packaging solutions.

The bench of Justices S Vaidyanathan and PT Asha was hearing a pleas relating to "plastic ban" in the State. It observed, "insofar as drinking water stored in plastic bottles is concerned, it becomes a significant problem not only to the well-being of the environment, but, affects the quality of our health, as well."

The court also directed the State Government to file a status report on how drinking water is prepared in the State and how the water cans were cleaned up. The court also enquired about the life span of water cans, how many days water was stored in water cans and the mechanism being followed for the destruction of these water cans. The court also directed the State to indicate whether records were maintained in this regard.

8. Whether 'Cost Inflation Index' Or 'Consumer Price Index' Be Used To Assess Notional Income In Motor Accident Claims? Madras HC Refers To Larger Bench

The Madras High Court recently took note of certain "anomalies" in fixing the notional income and consequent grant of compensation in motor accident claims. Since there are conflicting orders from two division benches on this issue, the court noted that there is a need for judicial pronouncement by a Larger Bench.

Justice PT Asha thus directed the registry to place the papers before the Chief Justice with a request to constitute a bench of appropriate strength to resolve the below issues:

1. Whether the Consumer Price Index adopted by the Central and State Government to revise wages or the Cost Inflation Index used to calculate capital gains should be used to fix the notional income in order to calculate the loss of income in the case of motor accident claims?

2. How should the notional income be fixed in the case of the unorganised sector which forms a chunk of the claims that are filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal?

9. Municipalities Can't Engage Manual Scavengers Through Private Contractors, Commissioners To Be Held Responsible: Madras High Court

Case Title: Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India and others

Case No: WP No. 17380 of 2017

While hearing a petition seeking to put an end to the practice of manual scavenging, the Madras High Court on Monday held that if any municipality was seen to engage in the practice of manual scavenging, even through private contractors, the Commissioner of the said municipality shall be made liable for the same.

The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala were hearing the petition filed by Safai Karmachari Andolan.

10. Kallakurichi Student Death: Madras High Court Directs Collector To Decide School's Representation For Reopening Within 10 Days

Case Title: Latha Educational Society Kaniyamoor v The State of Tamil Nadu and others

Case No: WP No.22084 of 2022

The Madras High Court on Tuesday directed the Collector of Kallakurichi District to consider the representation submitted by Latha Educational Society Kaniyamoor for reopening of its schools that were vandalized by rioters on July 17 following the death of a Class XII girl in one of the schools.

Justice Abdul Quddose directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation and pass an order within 10 days.

11. "No Right To Disparage Reputation" : Madras HC Restrains Savukku Sankar From Making Statements Against Minister Senthil Balaji

Case Title: V Senthil Balaji v. A Shankar

Case No: OA 509 of 2022 & A.No.3494 of 2022 in CS.No.172 of 2022

The Madras High Court on Tuesday granted an interim injunction to Minister Senthil Balaji in his plea against the defamatory allegations made by Youtuber Shankar alias Savukku Shankar. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy restrained Savukku Shankar from making any further derogatory vedios and statements.

12. LGBTQIA+ Community Sidelined For Far Too Long, High Time Govt Prioritizes Policies For Their Upliftment: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court was on Monday constrained to remark that persons belonging to the LGBTQIA+ community have been sidelined from the main society for a long period and it was high time that the government gives priority to implementing rules and policies for them.

The remarks were made by Justice Anand Venkatesh after the State sought 6 more months to come up with the final Transgender Policy.

13. Madras High Court Seeks Centre's Stand On Plea To Constitute 9th National Commission For Backward Classes

Case Title: K Balu v. Government of India and others

Case No: WP No. 21723 of 2022

The President of Advocates' Forum for Social Justice, K Balu has moved the Madras High Court seeking to constitute 9th National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) and to appoint Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and members in the Commission. The petition also seeks to set up State/ Regional units of the NCBC.

When the matter was taken up on Wednesday, the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala adjourned the case by six weeks directing the Union Ministry of Law and Justice and the Ministry of Appointments and Appointment Committee to file their counter.

14. AIADMK Leadership: Madras High Court Reserves Orders On Palaniswami's Appeal Against Order Restoring Status Quo Ante

Case Title: E Palaniswamy v. O Paneerselvam and others

Case No: OSA 227 of 2022

After a lengthy hearing that went on for the whole day, the Madras High Court on Thursday reserved orders on the appeal preferred by Edappadi Palaniswamy against a single judge order restoring status quo ante in the party as on 23^rd June 2022.

The bench of Justice M Duraiswamy and Justice Sunder Mohan further directed the counsels to file their written submissions by 3 pm on Friday.

15. Right To Appeal Accrues On Date Of Institution Of Suit: Madras HC Entertains Appeal Arising Out Of Claim Filed Prior To Motor Vehicle Amendment Act

When the Madras High Court registry put forward a query as to whether appeals whose value was less than one lakh rupees could be entertained in view of the amendment brought in by the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019, Justice PT Asha observed that the right to appeal accrued on the date of filing the claim petitions and therefore the amendment was not applicable to claims filed prior to the amendment.