Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 18 To September 24, 2023

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 271 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 277 NOMINAL INDEX EDAC Engineering v. Industrial Fans (India) Pvt Ltd, Application Nos 2080 and 4609 of 2021, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 271 Dr. V. Kalanidhi v State of Tamil Nadu, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 272 SV v. MR, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 273 Selvam v State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 274 Mariappan v Inspector of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 275 Ramya S Moorthy v Registrar of Trade Marks, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 276 Davidraj v Palanivel, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 277 REPORT Fees Fixed By The Arbitrator Cant Be Challenged, After Unconditional Acceptance By The Party: Madras High Court Case Title: EDAC Engineering v. Industrial Fans (India) Pvt Ltd, Application Nos 2080 and 4609 of 2021 Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 271 The High Court of Madras has held that once a party has unconditionally accepted the fees fixed by the arbitral tribunal during the arbitral proceeding cannot later challenge the fees of the arbitral tribunal by filing petition under Section 39(2) of the A&C Act. The bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose clarified that as per Section 39(1) of the Act, the arbitral tribunal possesses a lien on the award to cover any outstanding arbitration costs, and it has the authority to withhold the award's delivery until these costs are settled. Additionally, the Court emphasized that once a party unconditionally accepts the fees set by the tribunal during arbitration, they cannot later challenge the fees as unreasonable and request the release of the lien under Section 39(2). Madras High Court Asks DMK MP To Vacate Government Land Within One Month, Says Government Cannot Grant Lands On Own Whims And Fancies Case Title: Dr. V. Kalanidhi v State of Tamil Nadu Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 272 The Madras High Court recently directed DMK MP Dr. V Kalanidhi to vacate the Government Land, where he was running a private hospital, within one month and directed the government authorities to initiate actions to recover all; lawful dues from him as per law. Justice SM Subramaniam rejected Kalanidhi’s submission that the land was “Grama Natham” which he had acquired from Vendors who were the owners of the property and hence the Government did not have any right over the land. The court noted that the land had been classified as “Government Puramboke” land and thus, the MP was encroaching on the land. The court added that even assuming the land was not reclassified as Government Puramboke land, the Grama Natham lands were meant for housing the poor and could not be used for commercial purposes. Thus, the court noted that the Government was duty-bound to regulate the Grama Natham lands for the benefit of homeless poor people without any discrimination. Husband Taking 'Academic Break' Doesn't Extinguish His Duty To Maintain Wife And Children: Madras High Court Case Title: SV v. MR Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 273 While refusing to interfere with an order of maintenance made by the Family Court, the Madras High Court has observed that a husband is liable to pay maintenance to his wife and child even if he is on an academic break to pursue a Ph.D. “The amount awarded in our opinion would be just about sufficient for sustainance of one human being at the cost of living today. Merely because the petitioner has taken a study holiday or an Academic break, his duty to maintain his wife and child cannot take the back seat,” the court observed. Prisoner And His Fundamental Rights Do Not Part Ways At Prison Gates: Madras High Court Allows 40 Days Ordinary Leave To Life Convict Case Title: Selvam v State Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 274 While allowing the plea of a life convict prisoner to go on ordinary leave for 40 days, the Madras High Court emphasized that the fundamental rights of a prisoner do not end at the prison gates. The court noted that the prisoner had sought leave to make arrangements for the admission of his children and to repair his homestead both of which were covered by the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules 1982. Justice M Sundar and Justice R Shakthivel also emphasized that the rules governing leave were subordinate legislation that could not interfere with the constitutional powers of the court especially when it pertained to Article 21 of the Constitution. No Presumption Of Guilt Of Accused U/S 29 POCSO Act If Prosecution Fails To Establish Probability Of Foundational Facts: Madras High Court Case Title: Mariappan v Inspector of Police Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 275 The Madras High Court has recently observed that though there is a statutory presumption with respect to the guilt of an accused under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), this presumption will not operate when the prosecution has failed to prove some foundational facts with respect to the case. Justice K Murali Shankar thus...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 18 To September 24, 2023

Upasana Sajeev

Tags