Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 3 - February 9, 2025

Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 41 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 52 NOMINAL INDEX Anugraha Castings v. Anugraha Valve Castings Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 41M.Murugan v. The District Secretary (and connected cases), 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 42R. Ramalingam v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 43TR Balu v R Kannan and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 44V Ramkumar and Others v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 45Abbas Manthiri v. State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 46Thanushika v The Principal Commissioner of Customs (Chennai), 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 47M/s.Powergear Limited, Chennai. Vs. M/s.Anu Consultants, Hyderabad, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 48ABC v. XYZ, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 49Deepa v. S Vijayalakshmi, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 50Gopal Krishan Rathi vs. Dr. R. Palani, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 51M/s.Chennai Metro Rail Limited Vs Transtonnelstroy Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 52 REPORT Ex-Parte Orders Can Have Disastrous Consequences, Should Be Passed Only In Case Of Real Emergency: Madras High Court Case Title: Anugraha Castings v. Anugraha Valve Castings Limited Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 41 The Madras High Court recently emphasized that courts should refrain from passing ex-parte orders in a routine manner and must only pass such orders when there is a real emergency which was shown through the plaint and averments. The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that ex-parte orders can have disastrous consequences and could possibly bring a party's business to a halt. The court added that by the time the party is heard and the ex-party order is vacated, the party and its customers may have faced a huge loss. Pointing to the Supreme Court's direction in the case of Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes v. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira, in which the court enunciated the principles relating to granting or refusal of injunction, the High Court highlighted that the courts in the State should always bear the directions in mind and ensure that ex-parte orders are passed only in case of grave emergency. Thiruparakundram Hill Row | Madras High Court Allows Hindu Munnani To Protest Against Alleged Encroachment Case Title: M.Murugan v. The District Secretary (and connected cases) Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 42 The Madras High Court has allowed the Hindu Munnani to carry out demonstrations against alleged encroachment in the Thiruparakundram Hills where a Kasivishwanathar temple and a Sikkandar dargah have been coexisting. Noting that the entire issue could have been handled in a better way, the bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice R Poornima allowed the protests to be conducted by the organization today (4th February 2025), at Palanganatham junction between 5:00 pm and 6:00 pm. The court added that proper arrangements should be made for the protests and both the organisers and the police must ensure that no law and order issues arise due to the protests. The court also asked the organizers to ensure that only one megaphone be carried to the protest site and the entire protest be video graphed. Prisoner Cannot Be Denied Access To Minimal Facilities Required To Deal With His Physical Condition: Madras High Court Case Title: R. Ramalingam v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 43 The Madras High Court recently observed that prisoners have a right to access minimal facilities that are required to deal with their physical condition and the government could not shirk its responsibility for providing better facilities to prisoners. The bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice R Poornima noted that in some cases a prisoner's physical or medical condition may require certain facilities which should be provided to him. The court added that a prisoner, either convicted or undertrial did not cease to become a human being and continued to enjoy all fundamental rights including the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution. The court thus observed that prison justice could not be confined to a rigid framework and must be expanded taking into consideration the physical or medical condition of the prisoner. Freedom Of Press Can't Be Used To Tarnish Reputation Without Verifying News: Madras HC Orders Tamil Weekly To Pay ₹25 Lakh To DMK's TR Balu Case Title: TR Balu v R Kannan and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 44 The Madras High Court has ordered the Editor, Publisher and the Printer of Tamil Weekly 'Junior Vikatan', to pay Rs. 25,00,000 as damages to DMK's TR Balu for having published malicious and defamatory content against him without verifying the same. Justice AA Nakkiran remarked that the freedom of press was to be used for publishing news to the people backed by solid proof and could not be used to tarnish the image and reputation of a person without verifying the veracity of the news. The court added that Junior...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 3 - February 9, 2025

Upasana Sajeev

Tags