Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 23 to January 29, 2023

A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 25 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 33 NOMINAL INDEX Mr. AD Padmasingh Issac and others v. Karaikudi Achi Mess and another, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 25 The Designated Officer v. Jayavilas Tobacco Traders LLP, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 26 M/s. Paul Raj Engineering v. Assistant Commissioner (Circle), 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 27 University Grants Commission and another v. Annamalai University and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 28 Vatsala Jagannathan & Anr. versus Tristar Accommodations & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 29 G. Babu v. The District Collector and Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 30 Eswari v. Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 31 RS Deva alias Kamadevan v. The Home Secretary and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 32 TR Ramesh v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 33 REPORT Commercial Courts Act | Pre-Institution Mediation Is A Pre-Suit Legal Drill, Cannot Be Post Suit Exercise: Madras High Court Case Title: Mr. AD Padmasingh Issac and others v. Karaikudi Achi Mess and another Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 25 While rejecting a plaint by Aachi Spices and Foods seeking an injunction restraining Karaikudi Achi Mess from using a trademark name or similar sounding expression in any media, websites and other platforms, the Madras High Court has highlighted that “pre-institution mediation” mandated under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act is a pre-suit legal drill and it cannot be ordered as a post suit exercise. Justice M Sundar stressed that Section 12A is in the nature of a jurisdictional fact. This means that a party cannot plead that the pre-institution mediation will be carried out after the institution of the suit. Thus, any such attempt by the parties to dispense with pre-institution mediation is impermissible. ALSO READ: Commercial Courts Act | Trademark Infringement Suits Not Exempt From Pre-Institution Mediation Merely Because There Is Penal Consequence: Madras HC 'Food Safety Commissioner Can't Impose Permanent Ban': Madras High Court Sets Aside Ban On Sale Of Gutka, Pan Masala, Other Tobacco Products Case Title: The Designated Officer v. Jayavilas Tobacco Traders LLP Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 26 The Madras High Court recently set aside a notification issued by the state Commissioner of Food Safety imposing a ban on sale of Gutka, Pan Masala, flavoured or scented food products or chewable food products that contain tobacco or nicotine. While setting aside the notification, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice K Kumaresh Babu held that the commissioner had exceeded his powers while passing such a notification. The court agreed with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in Sugandhi Snuff King Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. Commissioner (Food Safety) Government of Delhi. Can the Writ Court Condone Delay Beyond Time Limit Under GST Act: Madras High Court Refers Issue To DB Case Title: M/s. Paul Raj Engineering v. Assistant Commissioner (Circle) Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 27 The Madras High Court has referred to the division bench the issue of the power of the high court under Article 226 to condone the delay beyond the maximum time limit stipulated under the GST Act. The single bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has observed that there were two contradictory views expressed by two judges of the Madras High Court. Madras High Court Upholds UGC's Power To Impose Territorial Restrictions On Distance Education Courses Case Title: University Grants Commission and another v. Annamalai University and others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 28 The Madras High Court has recently upheld the power of the University Grants Commission to impose Regulations for the conduct of Distance Education Programs by the universities. While disposing of a series of appeals filed by the University Grants Commission and other universities and private colleges relating to power of the Commission to impose such a condition, the Madras High Court ruled that since the University Grants Commission has been given primacy in matters of University education, the commission was within its authority to determine the standards of the universities. The court also lamented that such regulations came to be necessary since a lot of educational institutions have started to commercialise education by engaging in indiscriminate franchisee agreements with persons without any expertise. Non - Signatory Can Be Referred To Arbitration Under ‘Doctrine Of Alter Ego’: Madras High Court Case Title: Vatsala Jagannathan & Anr. versus Tristar Accommodations & Ors. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 29 The Madras High Court has ruled that non-signatories to arbitration agreement can be referred to arbitration by invoking the ‘doctrine of alter ego’ only in...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 23 to January 29, 2023

Upasana Sajeev

Tags