Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 To 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 253 NOMINAL INDEX Sun TV Network Limited v R Sukanya and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 XXXX v State and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 246 P Chockalingam v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 247 Sarkar Syed Habibullah Sha Kahdari Arif Rabbani Hazarat Dargha v Tamil Nadu Waqf Board and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 248 P Milany v Election Commission of India and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 249 Chinnavan @ Govindaraj and Another v The State and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 250 Rajammal v The Administrator and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 251 Saravanan v The State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 252 S Sathish Kumar and Others v State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 253 REPORT Madras High Court Upholds 2015 Order Directing Sun TV To Pay Compensation To Actress Sukanya Over Defamatory Remarks In Veerappan Interview Case Title: Sun TV Network Limited v R Sukanya and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 The Madras High Court has upheld an order a 2015 order of the trial court directing Sun TV to pay around Rs 10 Lakh compensation to actress Sukanya for airing the defamatory statements made by notorious criminal Veerappan in a 1996 interview with investigative journalist Gopal @ Nakheeran Gopal. Justice K Kumaresh Babu upheld the order after noting that there was malice on the part of Sun TV for not editing the defamatory part and not airing a regret in its own channel later. It may be noted that Sun TV had issued a regret in another magazine. The court noted that there was no explanation given on why the regret was published in a third-party magazine instead of airing it in the channel itself. Madras High Court Directs State To Pay Rs 10 Lakh Compensation To 3 Boys Sexually Assaulted By Father And Uncle Case Title: XXXX v State and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 246 The Madras High Court recently directed the State Government to pay Rs 10 Lakh each as compensation to three minor boys who were victims of sexual assault by their father and paternal uncle. Justice AD Jagadish Chandira took note of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Bhanei Prasad, where the court emphasized compensation in such exceptional circumstances where the children are victims of incestuous sexual violence committed by a parent. The court thus thought it was a fit case to grant compensation since the children were subjected to assault over a period of years, resulting in post-traumatic stress disorder, which needed continuous therapy. Madras High Court Closes Plea Challenging TN Police's Notice Blocking “X” URLs After Users Delete Posts Case Title: P Chockalingam v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 247 The Madras High Court, on Monday (June 8th), closed a plea challenging a notification issued by the Tamil Nadu police, directing the removal/blocking of multiple URLs on X/Twitter. The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan closed the plea after the counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the posts in question have been deleted by the users and thus nothing survived in the matter, making it infructuous. The petition was filed by social activist P Chockalingam, challenging the notice issued by the Tamil Nadu police under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act read with Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guideline and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021. Every Grave Or Dargah Not Automatically Waqf Property; Waqf Board Can't Take Control Merely Because It Has Muslim Religious Use: Madras HC Case Title: Sarkar Syed Habibullah Sha Kahdari Arif Rabbani Hazarat Dargha v Tamil Nadu Waqf Board and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 248 The Madras High Court recently set aside an order of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board declaring a 240-year-old Dargah as Waqf property. Justice Govindarajan Thilakavathi observed that for declaring a property as Waqf property, it had to be surveyed and notified as per the procedure laid down in the Waqf Act. The court added that every grave or dargah could not be termed as Waqf property and the existence of an endowment was essential. The court added that the Waqf Board cannot assume jurisdiction merely because the property is a Muslim religious institution. 'Filing Election Petition Is Statutory Right': Madras High Court Asks ECI To Furnish Udhayanidhi Stalin's Election Papers To Losing Candidate Case Title: P Milany v Election Commission of India and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 249 The Madras High Court recently directed the Election Commission of India to furnish the election-related documents of Udhayanidhi Stalin and other documents sought for by a candidate who contested from the same constituency for filing an...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers