Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 24 to March 30, 2025

Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 116 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 122 NOMINAL INDEX B Kavitha v. The Registrar General, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 116 Boopalan B v. Union of India and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 117 South Ganga Waters Technologies (P) Ltd., Rep. By its Authorized Signatory Mr.Vijay Ramesh, Chennai vs Vedanta Limited, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 118 State v. Govindaswamy and another, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 119 Marudhu Pandi v. The State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 120 Mohammed Faruk v. Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 121 Prasanna Sankaranarayanan v The State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 122 REPORT Madras High Court Orders Payment Of ₹1 Lakh Cost To Office Assistant Who Was Denied Maternity Leave By Magistrate, Calls It "Inhuman" Case Title: B Kavitha v. The Registrar General Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 116 Criticizing the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodavasal and the Principal District Judge, Thiruvarur for denying maternity benefit to an Office Assistant, the Madras High Court has held that when there was no dispute regarding the marriage, the employer should not seek proof beyond reasonable doubt for granting the maternity benefit. The bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice G Arul Murugan held that the action of the Magistrate was wholly unwarranted and inhumane. The bench added that when prima facie evidence was available, the Magistrate seemed to have fished for reasons and rejected the maternity leave application. Thus, the court directed the Registrar General of the Madras High Court to pay Rs. 1,00,000 to the woman for the mental agony suffered by her due to the respondents' actions. "Beyond Territorial Jurisdiction": Madras High Court Dismisses Ex-Serviceman's Plea Seeking Inquiry Into Havana Syndrome In India Case Title: Boopalan B v. Union of India and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 117 The Madras High Court recently dismissed a plea filed by an ex-serviceman who claimed that the Defence Space Agency was targeting him with the help of 'radiation' which caused severe health conditions and sought an inquiry into the 'Havana Syndrome' in India. A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekar noted that the man did not produce any medical records to establish such reactions in his body. The court was hearing the plea of B Boopalan, who claimed that due to high-frequency microwave radiation used by the Defence Space Agency against him, he is suffering from health issues. He submitted that he could feel the unknown high-frequency microwave radiations across his body including hitting on spinal area, harming on eyes, tongue and nose and brain, headache chilling and severe aches in his body. Party Nominating Arbitrator In Response To Notice U/S 21 Of Arbitration Act Is Prohibited From Raising Plea Of Limitation In Petition U/S 11: Madras HC Case Title: South Ganga Waters Technologies (P) Ltd., Rep. By its Authorized Signatory Mr.Vijay Ramesh, Chennai vs Vedanta Limited Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 118 The Madras High Court bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has held that once a party nominates an arbitrator in response to a notice issued under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), it cannot later argue in a petition under Section 11 of the Act that the claim for which the notice was issued is time-barred. The court observed that while deciding a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, the law is now well settled that the referral court will have to look only into the prima-facie existence of the arbitration clause and once the court is satisfied that there exists an arbitration clause, necessarily, the court will have to refer the dispute to arbitration. Unimaginable Rate Of Corruption In Country, If Anyone Accepts Bribe His Family Will Be Ruined: Madras HC Sets Aside Acquittal Of Customs Officer Case Title: State v. Govindaswamy and another Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 119 While setting aside the acquittal of a customs officer for amassing wealth disproportionate to his income, the Madras High Court recently remarked that corruption in India has gone into unimaginable ratio. Quoting the prophecies of Jesus, Justice KK Ramakrishnan remarked that the philosophy of life should be not to take bribes. The court found the officer's wife guilty of the offences and refused to quash the case against her. The court added that corruption starts from home, and when the homemaker herself becomes a party to the corruption, there would be no end. The court also emphasised the need to fight corruption from home. Madras High Court Refuses To Set Aside Murder Conviction, Finds 'Wordy Quarrel' With Deceased Insufficient To Show Accused Was Provoked Case Title: Marudhu Pandi v. The State Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 120 While refusing to set aside the conviction of a man for murder, the Madras High Court held...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 24 to March 30, 2025

Upasana Sajeev

Tags