Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: August 15 - August 21 2022

A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 360 NOMINAL INDEX V. Sounthar v. The District Collector, Erode District, Erode and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 The Principal General Manager, BSNL and another v. The Administrator, ISHA Foundation, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 351 V Anusha v. B Krishnan, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 352 Arul Daniel and others v. Suganya, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 353 M Raja v. Superintendent of Police, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 354 O Paneerselvam v. AIADMK and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 355 Pastor V. Mariya Arockiam v. The District Collector and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 356 S Sasikumar v. The Vice Chancellor and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 357 Vinith Baid v. Union of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 358 K Muthu v. The State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 359 Dr. S. Radhakrishnan v. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Medical Council and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 360 REPORT 1. "Can't Refuse Indians To Celebrate Independence Day": Madras HC Allows Conduct Of 'Rekla' Race As Part Of Independence Day Celebrations Case title - V. Sounthar v. The District Collector, Erode District, Erode and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 The Madras High Court recently granted permission for conducting Rekla race in connection with the 75th Independence Day Celebration and Aadi Temple Festival in the Bhavani Town of the state's Erode District. The bench of Justice T. Raja and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu said that since the Rekla race was to be conducted by residents of Erode District as part of the 75th Year Independence Day, therefore, refusing their prayer would send a message that Indians are refused to celebrate even the Independence Day. 2. "Award Patently Erroneous": Madras High Court Orders Fresh Arbitration In BSNL's Claim Against ISHA Foundation Case Title: The Principal General Manager, BSNL and another v. The Administrator, ISHA Foundation Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 351 The Madras High Court recently gave liberty to state-owned telecom provider BSNL to institute de novo arbitration against the ISHA foundation for its claim related to unpaid dues. The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy made the order after observing that the current arbitral award, which was passed without consulting an expert committee and without giving due regard to the evidences, was patently erroneous. 3. Husband Must Be Removed From House If It's The Only Way To Maintain Domestic Peace, Absence Of Alternate Accommodation Not Relevant: Madras HC Case Title: V Anusha v. B Krishnan Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 352 While allowing a wife's plea for permanent injunction, the Madras High Court has opined that if removal of the husband from home alone is the only way to ensure domestic peace, the Family Courts should not hesitate to pass such orders. The bench of Justice RN Manjula observed, "The protection orders are normally given to ensure the peaceful movement of a woman within her domestic sphere. When a woman fears the presence of her husband and screams, the Courts cannot be indifferent by just directing the husband that he should not harass the wife, but by allowing him to reside in the same house." 4. Whether Proceeding U/S 12 Domestic Violence Act Can Be Challenged Under Article 227 Constitution/ S.482 CrPC? Madras HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench Case Title: Arul Daniel and others v. Suganya Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 353 A single judge of the Madras High Court recently referred to a larger bench, the question regarding the applicability of provisions of Section 482 CrPC and/or Article 227 of the Constitution for quashing an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. Justice N Sathish Kumar was considering a batch of petitions seeking to quash the application filed under Section 12 of the DV Act by invoking the provision under Section 482 CrPC. 5. Govt Itself Permitted Businesses To Run 24x7, Police Cannot Restrict The Time On Their Own: Madras High Court Case Title: M Raja v. Superintendent of Police Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 354 While hearing a shop owner's plea to direct the police not to interfere with his business during late night hours, the Madras High Court noted that the Government of Tamil Nadu has already passed orders permitting shops in the State to run 24x7. In such a situation, the police cannot interfere with the business, except in case of any law-and-order situation. Justice N Satish Kumar observed: When the Government itself has permitted to run the business for 24x7, the police cannot restrict the time on their own. Accordingly, the respondents are directed not the interfere with the petitioner's business and they can interfere only in case of any law and order problem arose in the shop. 6. AIADMK Leadership : Madras High ...

Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: August 15 - August 21 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags