Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 to June 25

A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 169 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 173 NOMINAL INDEX Aarur Tamilnadam v S Sankar and others, 2023 Livelaw (Mad) 169 Sudha Sarveshkumar v Chief Secretary and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 170 Elephant G Rajendran v The Registrar General and others, 2023 Livelaw (Mad) 171 Kannaian Naidu and others v Kamsala Ammal and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 172 V Sundararaj v. The Registrar General and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 173 REPORTS Madras High Court Dismisses Suit Claiming Enthiran Movie Is Infringing Copy Of Story Published In 1996 Case Title: Aarur Tamilnadam v S Sankar and others Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Mad) 169 The Madras High Court recently dismissed a civil suit claiming that the story of Enthiran movie is based on the story “Jugiba” originally written by writer Aarur Tamilnadan. The suit sought a declaration that "Enthiran" is the infringing copy "Jugiba" and for a consequential injunction restraining the defendants from distributing or screening the film. Justice S Sounthar dismissed the plea by Aarur after noting that as per settled law, copyright cannot not be claimed over an idea or a concept. Aarur claimed that the movie Enthiran is based on his novel and that the makers of the movie illegally stole his story. He sought damages to the tune of one crore rupees and for stopping the screening of the movie. In his support, he also produced letters written by readers claiming that the film was based on his story. Madras High Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Reopening Of Villupuram Temple Sealed Over Caste Conflict Case Title: Sudha Sarveshkumar v Chief Secretary and others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 170 The Madras High Court has refused to entertain a plea filed by a native of Villupuram to reopen the Sri Dharmaraja Draupadi Amman Temple sealed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The temple, situated in Villupuram District, was sealed by the Revenue Divisional Officer on June 7 following a dispute over the entry of Scheduled Caste members into the temple. When a plea regarding reopening of the temple came up before the bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu, the court disposed of the same, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department. 'No Elite Society Of Lawyers At Public Cost' : Madras High Court Directs Madras Bar Association To Give Membership Without Any Discrimination Case Title: Elephant G Rajendran v The Registrar General and others Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Mad) 171 The Madras High Court recently came down heavily on the Madras Bar Association, for its strict bye-laws making it difficult for an ordinary lawyer to become a member of the association. The court also directed the Association to pay five lakh rupees as compensation to Senior Advocate Elephant G Rajendran for denial of drinking water to his son in 2012 by a senior lawyer. Justice SM Subramaniam noted that the bye-laws of the Association have been formulated in such a manner that ordinary Advocates find it difficult to get membership thus resulting in class discrimination. The court also noted that since the association was functioning inside the court premises and enjoying all the benefits including free electricity, such elitism could not be allowed in a public place using the money. Observing that practicing lawyers cannot be deprived of access to drinking water merely on the ground of membership, the court added that the present case was regretful and that both bar and bench should avoid such trivial and unwarranted situations. ALSO READ: 'Untouchability' Not Merely Caste-Based; Includes All Forms Of Social Exclusion Based On Idea That Certain Persons Are Inferior : Madras High Court Wife As Homemaker Contributes To Husband's Acquisition Of Assets; Entitled To Equal Share In Properties : Madras High Court Case Title: Kannaian Naidu and others v Kamsala Ammal and others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 172 In a significant verdict, the Madras High Court recently held that a wife, who contributed to the acquisition of family assets by performing the household chores, would be entitled to an equal share in the properties, as she had indirectly contributed to its purchase. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that though there was no legislation at present that recognized the contribution made by the wife, the court could very well recognize the same. The Court added that the law does not prevent a Judge from recognizing the contributions. The court agreed with the wife’s submission that she had contributed to the family by taking care of the household and the children. The court noted that the wife, though did not make direct financial contributions, had played a vital role in managing the household chores...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 to June 25

Upasana Sajeev

Tags