Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 1 - January 7, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 1 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 8

NOMINAL INDEX

Ganeshkumar v The Principal Secretary to Government, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 1

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus K.M.Mammen, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 2

ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 3

Dr R Karpagam v Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 4

Nagoorkani v The Commissioner and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 5

A Rajkumar v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 6

University Health Network v Adiuvo Diagnostics Private Limited and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 7

M/s.Radha Industries Versus Commissioner of Customs, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 8

REPORT

Madras High Court Issues Compendium Of Procedure To Be Followed By Advisory Board Constituted Under TN Preventive Detention Act

Case Title: Ganeshkumar v The Principal Secretary to Government

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 1

The Madras High Court recently issued a compendium of procedures to be followed by the Advisory Board under the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act 1982, while conducting an inquiry under sub-clause (a) of Clause (4) of Article 22 of the Constitution.

The bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice KK Ramakrishnan made it clear that the compendium was to be strictly followed by the State Advisory Board till the State came up with a law within Article 22(7)(c) of the Constitution. Article 22(7)(c) empowers the Parliament to prescribe laws to be followed by the advisory board while considering the detention of a person.

Madras High Court permits Compounding Of Prosecution In Tax Evasion Case By MRF Chairman & Managing Director

Case Title: The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus K.M.Mammen

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 2

The bench of Justice R. Mahdevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, while upholding the order passed by the single judge, held that since the penalty was reduced from 300% to 100% of the tax sought to be evaded, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 279(1A) of Income Tax. The section deals with non-prosecution for tax offences where the penalty is reduced.

The judgement has been delivered a writ appeal filed by the tax department challenging the order of the single judge who remitted the case back to Director General Income Tax ( Investigation ) with a direction to compound the case under Section 279 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Removal Of Wife's Uterus Due To Ovarian Cancer Not Mental Cruelty To Husband: Madras High Court Bins Plea For Divorce

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 3

The Madras High Court recently observed that the removal of a wife's uterus after being diagnosed with Ovarian cancer during the subsistence of marriage and subsequent inability to have a progeny will not be mental cruelty to the husband warranting dissolution of marriage.

The bench of Justice RMT Teekaa Raman and Justice PB Balaji thus confirmed an order of the Family Court dismissing the Husband's plea for dissolution of marriage on the grounds of mental cruelty, desertion and suppression of material fact.

Temple Festival At Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve: Madras High Court Asks Authorities To Follow Guidelines On Pilgrim Footfall

Case Title: Dr R Karpagam v Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 4

The Madras High Court has asked the authorities to take all steps as per the existing guidelines while conducting the Masi festival in the Adhi Karuvannarayar temple located in the Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve in February.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a public interest litigation filed by one Dr. R Karpagam seeking to regulate the movement of people in the tiger reserve during the festival.

Shop Cannot Be Closed Forever Merely For Keeping Banned Tobacco Products For Sale: Madras High Court

Case Title: Nagoorkani v The Commissioner and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 5

The Madras High Court recently commented that a shop could not be closed forever merely for keeping banned tobacco products for sale. The court thus directed the Food Safety and Drug Administration authorities to de-seal the shops.

Justice GR Swaminathan highlighted that the Food Safety and Standard Rules 2011 provided for sealing shops only during the inability to adhere to procedures contemplated under Section 38 of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006. The court thus noted that even if there was justification in initially sealing the premises, at some point it had to be de-sealed.

The court added that the shop owners had a right to carry on business as guaranteed under the Constitution. Adding that the Constitution did not give a right to trade in banned items, the court opined that the shopkeepers could still sell other products in their shops and by sealing the shop, their right to livelihood was affected.

Madras High Court Stays ED Summons To Private Contractors In Sand Mining Money Laundering Case

Case Title: A Rajkumar v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 6

The Madras High Court on Friday stayed the operation of summons issued to private contractors in connection with the ongoing investigations by the Enforcement Directorate in the sand mining money laundering case.

Justice SS Sundar and Justice Sunder Mohan granted a stay on a plea by A Rajkuamr, partner of RS Construction, Shanmugam Ramachandran, and K Rethinam. The court had previously also stayed the operation of summons issued to the District Collectors in connection with the investigation.

When Cause Of Action Partly Arose In Chennai, HC Has Territorial Jurisdiction Irrespective Of Location Of "Convenient Patent Office": High Court

Case Title: University Health Network v Adiuvo Diagnostics Private Limited and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 7

Rejecting an appeal claiming forum conveniens, the Madras High Court observed that the High Court will continue to have territorial jurisdiction, irrespective of the location of the appropriate patent office if a part of the cause of action arose within its territory.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that in the present case, the original petitioner had a patent and was conducting business in Chennai. Thus, the court rejected the appellant's argument that the rights of the parties played out in Delhi and that the Delhi High Court should have heard the matter.

Areca Nuts Have Limited Shelf-Life, Risk Of Contamination: Madras High Court Directs Verification Of Certificate Of Origin

Case Title: M/s.Radha Industries Versus Commissioner of Customs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 8

The Madras High Court has directed the verification of certificate of origin within 30 days and in case of failure of verification within time release the seized areca nut is subject to providing a bond for 100% of the value of goods but without insisting on a bank guarantee.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that areca nuts have a limited shelf-life and the risk of contamination and deterioration of goods increases over time.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Can Chief Minister Pursue A Case Against The State? Madras High Court Asks In Plea For CBI Probe Filed By MK Stalin In 2014

Case Title: MK Stalin v The Government of Tamil Nadu and others

Case No: WP 20702 of 2014

The Madras High Court on Tuesday wondered if the Chief Minister of a State can pursue a case against the State itself. The curious question arose when the bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy came across a petition filed by the current Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu MK Stalin back in 2014, when he was the treasurer of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party.

The matter pertained to the collapse of a 11-storey building that was under construction in Moulivakkam near Porur in Chennai in June 2014, killing 61 people and injuring 27. Expressing a lack of confidence in the investigation carried on by the SIT, Stalin approached the court seeking a transfer of investigation to the CBI. The matter was last listed in March 2017. Stalin assumed the CM office in May 2021.

“Glorifies Violence”: Plea In Madras High Court Seeks FIR Against Director Lokesh Kanagaraj, Revoking License Of “Leo” Movie

Case Title: Raja Murugan v The Director Lokesh Kanagaraj

Case No: WP(MD) 40 of 2024

An advocate has approached the Madras High Court seeking a ban on further broadcast of the movie “Leo” and for registration of an FIR against director Lokesh Kanagraj along with a compensation of Rs. 50,000.

Though the case was taken up by a bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice R Vijayakumar, since there was no representation, the matter was adjourned.

The petitioner, Raja Murugan of Madurai, a social activist and an advocate by profession, approached the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court alleging that the movies directed by Kanagaraj encouraged and glorified violence and were neither educative nor entertaining to watch. Murugan also contended that Kanagaraj was a 'psychopath' as in all of his movies, killing women was a common feature and his mental state also needed to be checked with a psychologist.

General Election 2024: Plea In Madras High Court Urges 100% Counting Of VVPAT Printout Slips Attached To EVMs

Case Title: S Packiaraj v The Election Commission of India

Case No: WP 34893 of 2023

A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court to count 100% of the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine printout slips attached to the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in the upcoming general elections.

When the case was taken up by the bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy, the counsel for the Election Commission sought for an adjournment and the case has been posted to January 19^th.

The petitioner, Packiaraj, an advocate by profession, submitted that to uphold democratic principles of free and fair elections and to ensure full transparency of the election process, it was important to count 100% of VVPAT printout slips attached with the EVMs for the ensuing April/May general elections.

Plea In Madras High Court Seeks Timely Publication Of Latest Medical College Infrastructure Assessment Reports, Online Availability Of Records

Case Title: Dr. Mohamed Khader Meeran AS v. Union of India and Others

Case No: WP 35573 of 2023

A plea has been moved in the Madras High Court seeking the timely publication of infrastructure assessment reports of Medical Colleges inspected by the National Medical Commission (NMC) for the academic years 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 along with ensuring availability of historical assessment records in the official website of NMC before the commencement of All India Counselling and subsequent admission process for each year.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravathy briefly heard the matter and posted it to January 19 for further hearing.