Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 08 to May 14

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 138 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 142

NOMINAL INDEX

Vaishnavi Jayakumar v The State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 138

M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. Versus Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 139

Dr. R Pavithra v The Commissioner of Police and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 140

S.Periyaraja v. The Principal Secretary and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 141

P Ayyakannu v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 142

REPORT

'World Is Theirs Too': Madras High Court Issues Directions To Make Public Transport Disabled Friendly

Case Title: Vaishnavi Jayakumar v The State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 138

In an attempt to make public transport in the state accessible to all including persons with disabilities, aged persons, pregnant women, and children, the Madras High Court has issued a slew of directions to the State, particularly the transport department.

The court also modified a tender floated by the transport department to ensure that more low-floor buses are procured by the State.

Madras High Court Upholds The Cancellation Of Customs Duty Exemption Certificate Issued To Apollo Hospitals

Case Title: M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. Versus Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 139

The Madras High Court has cancelled the cancellation of the customs duty exemption certificate (CDEC) issued to the Apollo Hospitals.

The bench of Justice S.M. Subramaniam has observed that the petitioner hospital has failed to establish that they have treated 40% of their outdoor patients in the hospital, where the imported medical equipment is installed. The petitioner hospital has also failed to establish that 10% of all the hospital beds are reserved for such patients who have received free treatment in the hospital where the imported medical equipment was installed.

Madras High Court Holds PayTM Liable For Unauthorised Debit From Customer’s Account, Asks RBI To Ensure Its Guidelines Are Followed

Case Title: Dr. R Pavithra v The Commissioner of Police and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 140

The Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of a post-graduate medical student, Dr R Pavithra who had lost around 3 lakh rupees from her account due to fraudulent unauthorized transactions on Paytm. She had approached the court after the City Union Bank failed to reverse the loss suffered by her and instead allegedly attempted to shift the blame on her.

Justice RN Manjula after hearing in detail the submissions of the City Union Bank, Paytm, and the Reserve Bank of India, held that the payments bank, ie, Paytm was liable for the transactions and not the petitioner’s bank.

Madras High Court Imposes Rs 25000 Cost On Lawyer For Challenging Private School's Vacation Classes

Case Title: S.Periyaraja v. The Principal Secretary and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 141

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 25000 on a lawyer for filing a “motivated petition” challenging the special classes being conducted for students of Class X and XII by a private school. The court said that the amount be paid to the Corporation Girls Higher Secondary School in Tirunelveli and be used for the construction of a toilet or purchasing Napkin Vending Machine for the school.

Finding that the petitioner S Periyaraja was not an aggrieved person, the bench of Justice M Dhandapani and Justice R Vijayakumar noted that the petition had been filed specifically against a particular school when there were several other schools that were conducting special classes all over Tamil Nadu. The court also noted how several coaching centers were also conducting classes for 12th-standard students to train them for competitive exams like NEET, JEE, CLAT, etc.

Essential Commodities Act Is One Of Primary Reasons For Existence Of Our Democracy: Madras High Court

Case Title: P Ayyakannu v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 142

The Madras High Court has observed that the Essential Commodities Act ,1955, is one of the "primary reasons of the very existence of our democracy" and that both central and state governments are extremely sensitive and careful when it comes to food and that is why, the people of this country "worship their leaders".

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy also observed that the Fair and Remunerative Price, which is the minimum price that sugar mills must pay farmers and fixed by the Central Government, is in reality not a fair market price.

The court added that the actual expenses involved by the farmer are more than 80% of the FRP. The court also encouraged the State Governments to take into account the actual market value and actual expenses involved while fixing the State Advised Price (SAP).

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Madras High Court Asks BCI, State Bar Council To Respond On Issue Of High Enrolment Fee For Law Graduates

Case Title: Manimaran v. Bar Council of India and Others

Case No: WP (MD) 8756 of 2023

The Madras High Court has directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to respond to a plea by Manimaran, a fifth-year law student, challenging the enrollment fee charged by it from law graduates.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy prima facie agreed that the amount was high and issued notice on the petition. The Bar Council of India and the state government have also been issued notice by the court.

Tamil Nadu Govt Files Criminal Defamation Case Against BJP State President K Annamalai For Statements Against CM MK Stalin

Tamil Nadu government has moved the Principle District and Sessions Court Chennai seeking action against the State President of Bharatiya Janata Party K Annamalai for making defamatory statements against the Chief Minister MK Stalin. The complaint has been moved through City Public Prosecutor.

On May 14th, Annamalai had released 'DMK Files', claiming that many members of the ruling DMK party were involved in corruption including the CM. He had claimed that the CM had received money to the tune of Rs 200 crore from an Indo-European shell company for awarding tenders.

The criminal defamation petition says that the speech made by Annamalai was intending to harm the reputation of the CM in respect of his conduct in the discharge of his public function. It is also submitted that the defamatory speech was made without any basis or evidence during a press conference and was widely carried by the media. The petition says that the speech is in the nature of causing considerable harm to the high repute enjoyed by the Chief Minister.