Madras High Court Monthly Digest - November 2023

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 335 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 374 NOMINAL INDEX ML Ravi v The Secretary and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 335 Capt.Dr.VRC.Pandiyan v The Chairman and Managing Director, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 336 BR Aravindakshan v The Chief Secretary and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 337 Magesh Karthikeyan v The Commissioner of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 338 Ramar v State (and connected cases), 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 339 Venu Srinivasan v Rangarajan Narasimhan, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 340 The Secretary v Elephant G Rajendran and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 341 M.Kalpana v The Secretary, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 342 Mrs Nirosha v Principal Secretary to Government, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 343 All India Gaming Federation v State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 344 S Amar Prasad @ Amar Prasad Reddy v Inspector of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 345 Thorapadi Urban Co-op Credit Society Limited v Income Tax Officer, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 346 Tribhuwan Kumar Tiwari v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 347 KR Jayagopi v The Hon’ble Tamil Nadu Lokayukta and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 348 R.Revathy Versus ACIT, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 349 ITC Limited v Britannia Industries Ltd, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 Ringfeder Power Transmission India Private Ltd v Rajesh Mootha, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 351 M/s.Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 352 M/s.Shewil Trading Company Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 353 Mohamed Irfan v Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 354 Dr. D.Hariharan and Others v. Union of India and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 355 Sushma v State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 356 R.P. Darrmalingam Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 357 Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy Versus PCIT, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 358 G.Mayakannan v. The District Collector, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 359 Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd v Dr Dheeraj Saurabh, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 360 AM Paramasivan and another v State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 361 State v XXX, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 362 M/s. Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus JCIT, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 363 M/s. Jain Metal Rolling Mills Versus Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 364 Manav Menon Versus DCIT, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 365 Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees’ Federation v Government of Tamil Nadu, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 366 Gunasekaran v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 367 State of Tamil Nadu v Enforcement Directorate, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 368 T M Selvaganapathy and Others v State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 369 Yohann J.Setna v State of Tamil Nadu, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 370 J Jayaraj and Others v The Chief Educational Officer, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 371 Lakshmichandra Harishchandra Sharma v Union of India and Another, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 372 Mangalam v. The State Government and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 373 K Gopinath v District Collector, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 374 REPORTS "Political Parties Have A Right To Agitate": Madras High Court In Plea Against Signature Campaign Launched By DMK Against NEET Case Title: ML Ravi v The Secretary and Others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 335 While hearing a public interest litigation filed against the signature campaign launched by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party against the NEET exam, the Madras High Court remarked that every political party has a right to agitate against something and the same could be interfered with only if it was against the public policy. The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a public interest litigation filed by Advocate ML Ravi. "A person may launch a campaign against anything. How can you oppose that. If a particular party wants to agitate against something, they have the right to do that. You can't have a problem with that. But if a decision is taken, which according to you is against the public policy then you can challenge that. There should be a limit to filing these petitions," the court orally remarked. The court questioned Ravi on how he was affected with a political party carrying out a campaign. The court then directed Ravi to deposit one lakh rupees after which Ravi informed the court that he'll withdraw the plea. Madras High Court Orders CBI Probe After Litigant Produces "Suspicious" Notification Claiming He Is Additional Judge Of Punjab & Haryana HC Case Title: Capt.Dr.VRC.Pandiyan v The Chairman and Managing Director Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 336 The Madras High Court has directed the Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Madurai to conduct an investigation into a notification produced by a litigant before it claiming he is an Additional Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Justice B Pugalendhi of the Madurai bench directed the Superintendent to verify the...

Madras High Court Monthly Digest - November 2023

Upasana Sajeev

Tags