Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 12 To September 18 2022

A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 398 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 405 NOMINAL INDEX Andal Dorairaj & Ors. versus M/s. Rithwik Infor Park Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 398 TCI Freight Versus The Assistant Commissioner, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 399 Kasthuribha and Indira Nagar Residents Welfare Forum v. Secretary, PWD, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 400 Nordex India Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 401 Deepan v State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 402 B Ramkumar Adityan v District Collector, Thoothukudi, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 403 Registrar Judicial v. Shankar @ Savukku Sankar and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 404 Innovators Facade Systems Ltd. versus Larsen & Toubro Limited, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 405 REPORT 1. Parties Can Deviate From Terms Of Jurisdiction Under The Arbitration Clause Only Once: Madras High Court Case Title: Andal Dorairaj & Ors. versus M/s. Rithwik Infor Park Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 398 The Madras High Court has ruled that the parties have got the liberty to deviate from the terms with respect to the jurisdiction, as contained in the Arbitration Clause; however, the number of such deviations is limited to only one. The Single Bench of Justice R.N. Manjula held that waiver of the jurisdiction clause contained in the arbitration agreement can be presumed from the conduct of the parties. The Court added that if the parties have waived the earlier agreement on jurisdiction and have substituted a new jurisdiction by conduct, then, in view of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), the parties cannot make any further diversions with respect to the jurisdiction. 2. Transporter Of Goods May Seek Release Of Only The Conveyance: Madras High Court Case Title: TCI Freight Versus The Assistant Commissioner Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 399 The Madras High Court has held that the transporter may seek release of only the conveyance upon satisfaction of the statutory conditions. The division bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that the phrase 'person transporting the goods' in Sections 129(1) and (6) to mean the owner or his agent who has contracted to supply the goods, and not the transporter who will provide the carriage for the same. Both sub-Sections 129(1) and (6) use the phrase 'goods or conveyance' whereas the proviso extends the benefit of release, upon terms, to the transporter, but is restricted to the conveyance alone. 3. Every Individual Has Duty To Protect National Environment: Madras High Court Orders Removal Of Encroachments From Buckingham Canal Case Title: Kasthuribha and Indira Nagar Residents Welfare Forum v. Secretary, PWD Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 400 While disposing of a writ petition filed by Kasturbha and Indira Nagar Residents Welfare forum seeking to remove encroachments from the Buckingham Canal lying between Chennai and Puducherry, the Madras High Court emphasised that it was the duty of every individual to protect and improve the national environment and the national assets The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala observed that the citizens and the government were two wheels of development and if any one wheel derails, it will affect the development. The court also pointed out that encroachments were a direct reflection on the failure of the Government to provide basic facilities to the poor. 4. Madras High Court Allows Concessional Customs Duty Benefit On Goods Used In Rotor Of Windmills For Notional Billing To Customer Case Title: Nordex India Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 401 The Madras High Court has allowed the concessional customs duty benefit on goods used in the rotor of windmills for notional billing to customers. The single bench of Justice M. Nirmal Kumar has observed that the imported rotor blades need no customization and mechanisation. Hence, raising an invoice in the name of the client after importing and transporting it to the customer's site is only a notional exercise. It cannot be said that the petitioner is not the importer and that he is the person who has used it for a specific purpose for which it was imported. 5. Madras High Court Asks Man To Distribute Pamphlets Against Drunken Driving As Condition For Bail Case Title: Deepan v State Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 402 The Madras High Court recently set a unique condition for bail for a man accused of drunken driving. While granting bail, the bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira, directed the petitioner Deepan to distribute pamphlets against "Drunken Driving" everyday in the morning and evening for a period of two weeks. 6. "Denigrates Hindu Religious Sentiments": Madras High Court Asks Police To Prohibit All ...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 12 To September 18 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags