Supreme Court dismissed the petitions filed by lawyers from Madras HC alleging that Gowri is disqualified from being appointed a judge of a Constitutional Court, as there was no fruitful consultation between the executive and the collegium regarding her antecedents that could reveal her biasness against the minorities in the country.
The President has appointed following as the Additional Judges of Madras High Court in that order of seniority, for a period of
Madras High Court stated that the expression “person suffering from multiple disability” under 1999 Act will be equivalent in meaning to “person with benchmark disability” under Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. Thus, allowed the petitioner to be appointed as a guardian to her sister, suffering from schizophrenia.
Madras High Court held that the petitioners are not entitled to join respondents 3 to 5 as parties to arbitral proceedings, as they do not qualify as “alter egos” of the first respondent or as successors-in-interest.
Madras High Court permitted Srilankan refugees’ daughter to apply for passport under Section 20 of the Passports Act and directed the Central Government to consider her application and pass order.
The recruitment process to any public post should be conducted in a fair and transparent manner. If the candidates are selected by any criterion other than merit and efficiency, the public authority will suffer for all the times to come. It is in the public interest that the process of selection and appointment should be transparent to make it foolproof from corrupt practices.
Madras High Court while quashing the Khula certificate issued by the Shariat Council, held that while it is open for a Muslim woman to exercise her inalienable rights to dissolve the marriage by Khula recognised under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 by approaching a Family Court, it cannot be before Shariat Council.
The Commissioner, Food Safety, by issuing successive notifications under Section 30(2)(a) cannot impose an almost permanent ban on a food product, as it is not contemplated by law and if allowed, will amount to doing violence to the provisions.
The damage and injury suffered by the children can very well be imagined. They have suffered disfiguration, lost friendship and company and suffered studies . Their marital prospects have become a serious question mark. No amount of compensation can give back what they lost. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the Court granted them compensation of Rs. 10.00 lakhs each.
by K. Vaitheeswaran*
Madras High Court held that the police has to permit the petitioner to conduct an oratory competition on the 68th Birth Anniversary of Prabakaran the leader of the banned outfit LTTE and set aside unsuitable conditions imposed by the police on the petitioner
The Supreme Court Collegium stated that the Intelligence Bureau report noted that nothing came against his integrity who also did not have any overt political leanings, therefore, its adverse comments in respect of posts made by Advocate R. John Sathyan would not impinge on his suitability, character, or integrity.
Madras High Court while dealing with the question that whether the mother had the intention to commit the murder of her daughter, set aside the conviction and sentence of the convict for the offence under Section 302 IPC and convicted her for offence under Section 304(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment
The Supreme Court noticed that in the case at hand, without giving any reasonable time to the investigating agency to investigate the allegations in the FIR, the Madras High Court has, in haste, quashed the criminal proceedings.
It is to be remembered that birth of a baby is rebirth of a mother and if a woman is not properly taken care during the period of pregnancy and after delivery, it will certainly affect two lives, namely, mother and new borns
Madras High Court granted police protection for conducting Cock fight to mark the birthday celebrations of the late Chief Minister Dr.M.G.Ramachandran, subject to certain conditions.
Madras High Court said that when the court issues a specific direction, it’s the prison official's duty to verify it and clarify if they have doubts. Thus, held that the detention was illegal.
Madras High Court said that, while dealing with the issue involved in this public interest litigation, the following words of the South African anti-apartheid activist, Nelson Mandela resonate in their mind – “No one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones”.
Statutory warnings are intended to instill a sense of fear, but they have had very little effect on human attitudes and behaviour towards alcohol consumption. It is also a sorry state of affairs that persons under 21 years, who are specifically prohibited from drinking alcohol, are in fact addicted to it. Therefore, it is incumbent on the State Government to reduce alcohol dependence and addiction as a public health measure by restricting and effectively regulating its sale and consumption.
While quoting “Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not fall into a pit?”, the Madras High Court said that the first blind person in this case is the Sessions Judge, who was guiding the Magistrate, who was also blind, due to ignorance of the legal position and ultimately, both fell in a pit, leading to illegal and non est orders passed by the Magistrate.