Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 20 to March 26, 2023

A weekly round-up of important cases from the Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 93 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 102 NOMINAL INDEX Mr VB Selvaganapathy B.A B.L v. The Registrar (Administration) High Court of Madras and Ors, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 93 AC Murugesan and others v. The District Collector and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 94 Periya Elayaraja and others v. The District General of Police and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 95 Prashant Umrao @ Prashant Kumar Umrao v. Inspector of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 96 The Sports Development Authority v. The Tamil Radhesoami Satsang Association, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 97 V Shanmugham (Deceased) and others v. Union of India and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 98 The Royal Lands and Nest Cooperative Housing Society Ltd v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and another, 2023 Livelaw (Mad) 99 Cont.P.No.2622 of 2022, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 100 Leena Manimekalai v. Susi Ganeshan, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 101 Santhosh vs. The Commercial Tax Officer & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 102 REPORT Allotment Of Law Chambers Should Be As Per Procedure, Not Favouritism: Madras High Court Case Title: Mr VB Selvaganapathy B.A B.L v. The Registrar (Administration) High Court of Madras and Ors Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 93 The Madras High Court has observed that favouritism while allotting law chambers should not be encouraged and the allotments should be made as per the established procedure. The court added that even if certain adjustments were to be made, they should not be unilateral decisions and the consent of the Lawyers concerned was necessary. Justice SM Subramaniam noted that whenever any complaint was received with respect to the allotment, the allegations were to be enquired into in compliance with the rules of natural justice. The registry wsa expected to conduct an inquiry after affording an opportunity to all the parties. No Forest Rights Merely Because Ancestors Resided In Forest, Must Establish Sole Dependency On Forest For "Bonafide Livelihood Needs": Madras High Court Case Title: AC Murugesan and others v. The District Collector and others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 94 While refusing relief to a group of persons claiming benefit under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, the Madras High Court noted that rights under the Act cannot be claimed merely on the ground that the ancestors originally resided in the forests. For claiming rights under the Act, it was necessary to establish that the persons were solely dependent upon the forest for their bonafide livelihood. Justice N Satish Kumar also agreed with an earlier view taken by the division bench where it was held that bonafide livelihood included ploughing, irrigation, and planting for the purpose of livelihood, but not for commercial exploitation of the land. Madras High Court Orders Police Action Against Unqualified Alternative Medicine Practitioners, Says State Must Act Against Unrecognised Institutes Case Title: Periya Elayaraja and others v. The District General of Police and others Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 95 Refusing relief to 61 persons claiming to be practicing alternative medicine, the Madras High Court said that unqualified persons cannot claim any right to practice alternate medicines. The court was also critical of unrecognised institutions conducting six months medical courses and issuing diploma certificate and noted that the same would bring disastrous consequences for the society. Justice SM Subramaniam said it is the duty of the State to ensure that these unrecognised institutions are dealt with properly and such invalid diploma certificates are cancelled. Madras High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To BJP's Prashant Umrao In FIR Over Tweets Regarding Bihar Migrant Workers In TN Case Title: Prashant Umrao @ Prashant Kumar Umrao v. Inspector of Police Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 96 The Madras High Court has granted anticipatory bail to UP BJP Spokesperson Prashant Umrao in an FIR lodged by the Tamil Nadu police against him for allegedly spreading false information on the alleged attacks against the migrant workers from Bihar in Tamil Nadu. Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan granted anticipatory bail on the condition that Umrao will file an undertaking stating that he will to tweet or forward any such message to promote enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language etc., before the jurisdictional magistrate. Can Entertain Delay Condonation Applications In Execution Proceedings Even In Absence Of Specific Provision: Madras High Court Reiterates Case Title: The Sports Development Authority v. The Tamil Radhesoami Satsang Association Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 97 The Madras High Court recently reiterated that...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 20 to March 26, 2023

Upasana Sajeev

Tags