Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 10 to October 16 2022

A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 425 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 433 NOMINAL INDEX Mr N Nagarajan v. Mr. Schekar Raj, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 425 T.Keeniston Fernando v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 426 Azizul Karim v. PS Kirubakaran and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 427 Murali v. The Inspector of Police ,2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 428 A. Irudayaraju Versus The State Tax Officer, Adjudication Cell, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 429 Tamilselvi v. The Secretary to Government and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 430 Asia (Chennai) Engineering Company Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 431 Abirami S v. The Union of India and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 432 Chennai Water Desalination Ltd. v. Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board, O.P. No. 298 of 2019, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 433 REPORT 1. S.23 Senior Citizens Act: Madras HC Cancels Settlement Deed Executed In Favour Of Son After He Failed To Look After Aged Parents Case Title: Mr N Nagarajan v. Mr. Schekar Raj Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 425 Moved by the plight of an old couple, the Madras High Court recently upheld the judgement and decree of the trial court and cancelled a settlement deed executed in favour of their son, after the court was convinced that the son failed to look after the aged parents. Even if the deed is considered as a settlement deed by virtue of Section 23 of the Maintenance Act the same has to be declared void in as much as the plaintiff has failed to comply with the obligations imposed upon him under the deed by ignoring the medical needs of the parents. 2. S.43D UAPA | Report of Public Prosecutor Contains Details of Investigation, Need Not Be Shared With Accused: Madras High Court Case Title: T.Keeniston Fernando v. State Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 426 The Madras High Court recently denied bail to two Srilankan nationals, who are accused of attempting to siphon off funds from the bank account of a deceased woman in Mumbai to fund LTTE. The bench of Justice PN Prakash and Justice Teeka Raman denied bail after observing that the indefeasible right for default bail stood extinguished as the National Investigation Agency (NIA) had already submitted the final report. 3. Madras High Court Requests Advocate General To Consider Invoking Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act Against Chennai Resident Case Title: Azizul Karim v. PS Kirubakaran and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 427 The Madras High Court recently requested the Advocate General R Shunmugasundaram to consider passing appropriate orders under the Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act 1949 against a Chennai resident who is prima facie in the habit of filing vexatious litigations in different courts throughout the state. The bench of Justice Paresh Upadhyay and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy gave liberty to the Advocate General to consider the materials on record and pass appropriate orders as he deems fit. 4. Madras High Court Quashes NDPS Proceedings After Authorities Fail To Test Contraband Even After 5 Years Case Title: Murali v. The Inspector of Police Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 428 The Madras High Court recently quashed FIR against a man booked under the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 for possessing ganja after observing that there were serious lapses on the part of the investigating officer. Justice G Jayachandran observed that the seized contraband had not been tested for its content even after 5 years. Further, in spite of directions by the court, the Investigating Officer had not taken steps to number the final report. 5. Detention Order not Passed based on Statutory Timelines: Madras High Court Directs Release of Vehicle Case Title: A. Irudayaraju Versus The State Tax Officer, Adjudication Cell Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 429 The Madras High Court has ordered the release of the vehicle as the department has failed to pass the detention order within the period as provided for under Section 129 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act) and no show cause notice has been issued within the period of 7 days as set out under Section 129(3) of the TNGST Act. The single bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has observed that since the statutory show cause notice is to be issued within a period of 7 days from the date of interception, it becomes incumbent upon the authorities to pass an order of detention prior thereto. 6. Third Gender Candidates Entitled To Special Reservation: Madras High Court Case Title: Tamilselvi v. The Secretary to Government and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 430 The Madras High Court has directed the state Health and Family Welfare Department and Directorate of Medical Education to provide special reservation to...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 10 to October 16 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags