Home Page

Judgments

Madras High Court

The Madras High Court, founded on June 26, 1862, is one of the oldest and most prestigious courts in India. It is situated in the state of Tamil Nadu and has a rich history spanning over a century and a half. The court has undergone significant transformations and has evolved into a crucial institution in the Indian legal system. Over the years, it has adapted to changing societal needs and legal frameworks, making it an essential pillar of justice in the country.

The Madras High Court has played a vital role in shaping India's legal history. It has been at the forefront of landmark judgments and has played a crucial role in upholding the rule of law. The court's contribution to the development of legal jurisprudence is significant and has set precedents in various fields of law.

The Madras High Court is located in Chennai, the capital city of Tamil Nadu. The court is situated in a building that is an architectural marvel and is an important landmark in the city. The high court building is spread over an area of 5.5 acres and has a total of 75 courtrooms. It is easily accessible by road, rail, and air.

Location of Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has jurisdiction over the state of Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Puducherry. The court is empowered to hear and adjudicate civil and criminal cases that arise within its jurisdiction. It also has the power to issue writs and orders for the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

The Madras High Court also has a special jurisdiction in relation to the administration of Hindu religious and charitable endowments in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. It also exercises appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate courts in its jurisdiction.

One of the most important features of the Madras High Court is its ability to provide judgment copies online through Madras High Court judgment copy. This feature is extremely useful for litigants who are not based in Chennai and cannot visit the court to collect the judgment copy. The process of obtaining a Madras High Court judgment copy online is quite simple. One can visit the Madras High Court website, click on the 'Judgments' tab, and then search for the relevant case by entering the case number, party name, or advocate name. Once the case is located, the Madras High Court judgment copy can be downloaded.

The Madras High Court website is a one-stop-shop for all information related to the court. The website is user-friendly and provides access to a variety of services, including madras high court case status, cause list, daily orders, and chennai high court judgments. The Madras High Court home page is designed to provide easy access to all the services offered by the court. The Madras High Court home page also provides information about the history of the court, the judges, and the functioning of the court.

The Madras High Court conducts various exams for the recruitment of staff, including clerks, typists, and assistants. The court also conducts exams for the recruitment of judges. The Madras High Court results of these exams are published on the Madras High Court website. Candidates can visit the website, click on the 'Recruitment' tab, and then search for the relevant exam. Once the exam is located, the Madras High Court result can be viewed and downloaded in PDF format.

Madras High Court Jurisdiction

The Madras High Court is a well-known institution in the Indian legal system. It is located in the capital city of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, and has jurisdiction over the state of Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Puducherry. In addition to the main court, there is also a Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, which serves the southern districts of Tamil Nadu. 

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court was established in the year 2004 to serve the districts of southern Tamil Nadu. The bench has jurisdiction over the districts of Madurai, Dindigul, Ramanathapuram, Theni, Virudhunagar, Sivagangai, and Tuticorin. The Madurai Bench has 16 judges, including the Chief Justice of Madras High Court, who frequently visits the bench to hear important cases.

In a recent Chennai High Court judgment, the Madras High Court declared that a marriage solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act cannot be annulled on the grounds of impotence alone. The court observed that impotence is a curable condition and that a marriage should not be dissolved without exploring all possible remedies. This Chennai High Court judgment brings a much-needed clarity on the issue of annulment on the grounds of impotence and will have a significant impact on future cases involving such claims.

The establishment of the Madurai Bench has been a boon for litigants from the southern districts of Tamil Nadu, who no longer have to travel to Chennai to attend court hearings. The Madurai Bench has also helped to reduce the workload of the main court in Chennai.

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

Some of the significant judgments passed by the Madras High Court are listed below:

This landmark judgment set the precedent for the disqualification of elected representatives under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, for indulging in corrupt practices.

In this case, the Madras High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the film censorship laws and ruled that censorship should only be used in exceptional cases where it is necessary to maintain public order.

The Madras High Court struck down a Tamil Nadu law that reserved 69% of government jobs and seats in educational institutions for socially and educationally backward classes, exceeding the Supreme Court's limit of 50% reservation. The court held that the law violated the equality principle enshrined in the Constitution.

Important Madras Court Judgments

The Madras High Court has a total of 57 judges, including the Chief Justice of Madras High Court. The current Chief Justice of Madras High Court is Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari. 

Judges of High Court

The judges of the Madras High Court are renowned for their legal acumen and have delivered several landmark judgments over the years. They are known for their strict adherence to the principles of justice and fairness, and their decisions have had a profound impact on the legal system of the country.

The Madras High Court provides several services to litigants, including online access to madras high court case status and judgments. Litigants can visit the official website of the court and check the status of their case by entering the case number or party name. They can also download the judgment copy of their case from the website.

The number of judges in the court is decided by the Government of India based on the workload of the court and the number of pending cases. The Madras High Court has a reputation for being one of the busiest courts in India, and as such, it has a large number of judges to handle the workload.

Number of Judges Present

The appointment of judges to the Madras High Court is done through a rigorous process that ensures that only the most qualified and experienced lawyers are appointed to the bench. The process begins with the High Court Collegium, which is made up of the Chief Justice of India, the Chief Justice of Madras High Court, and two other senior judges of the court.

The Collegium reviews the names of eligible candidates who have been recommended by the Bar Council of India, the state government, or other legal bodies. The Collegium then shortlists the candidates based on their qualifications, experience, and other factors.

The shortlisted candidates are then subjected to a thorough background check, including a review of their past judgments and any potential conflicts of interest. The Collegium then makes its final recommendations to the President of India, who has the final authority to appoint judges to the Madras High Court.

The Madras High Court is known for delivering several landmark judgments over the years, many of which have had a significant impact on the legal system of India. The court has handled several high-profile cases, including cases related to civil, criminal, and constitutional matters.

One of the most famous judgments delivered by the Madras High Court was in the case of Dr. K. Veeramani vs. Government of Tamil Nadu in 2010. In this case, the court held that the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in educational institutions must not exceed 50% of the total seats. This judgment had a far-reaching impact on the reservation policy in the country.

Another important judgment delivered by the Madras High Court was in the case of M.P. Paul vs. Union of India in 2014. In this case, the court declared that the selection of judges for appointment to the higher judiciary must be based on merit alone and not on any other criteria.

Judges Appointment Procedure

Madras HC Former Chief Justices,

Stay updated with latest Chennai High Court judgements. Get access to legal precedents and landmark judgments for free to make informed decisions.

Madras High Court Judgements Listing

Get insider news on Madras High Court and Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in just a few clicks. Know everything from the latest legal developments to key historical cases of Madras High Court from many years. With user-friendly tools and expert analysis, grow your knowledge about Madras High Court results using this free Search Engine for Indian Law.

pkn W.P.(MD)Nos.23979 to 23987, 24042 to 24044 of 2016 of 2016 29.03.2023 3/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

With the consent of learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.2. The writ petitioner joined the Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services as Junior Assistant in the year 2010. He was promoted to the post of Medical Record Technician on 27.12.2018. His services have since been regularised in the said post also. The next promotional post is that of Medical Record Officer. The petitioner's grievance is that he has not been included in the panel to be considered for being promoted to the said post. The only reason set out for excluding the petitioner from the promotion panel is that the petitioner had not completed his probation. This is evident from Annexure II of the impugned proceedings. Aggrieved by the exclusion, the writ petition came to be filed.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the grounds of the view. I am not however swayed by the same. I had categorically held that the petitioner will have to move only jurisdictional civil Court for relief. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states though a plaint was filed before the District Munsif Court, Thirumayam, it is yet to be numbered.2.The District Munsif Court, Thirumayam is directed to number the suit instituted by the petitioner forthwith and without any delay and also take up the interim application filed by the petitioner for speedy disposal.

(Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.2. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.[R.S.M., J.] & [L.V.G., J.] 29.03.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes skn Note: upload today.

The petitioner had challenged an order dated 09.05.2016 of the third respondent relating to the appointments of respondents 4 and 5.https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9622 of 20162. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no objection to the appointments of respondents 4 and 5.However, he submits that the question relating to the right of the third respondent to make such appointments may be left open for adjudication in an appropriate case.3. By acceding to the said request, W.P. (MD) No.9622 of 2016 is disposed of by taking note of the submission that the petitioner has no objection to the appointments of respondents 4 and 5. The question relating to the right of the third respondent to make such appointments is left open for adjudication in an appropriate case. There shall be no order as to costs.

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the return order in Settled Out of Court Memo, dated 20.12.2022, in O.S.No.400 of 2022, on the file of the VI Additional District Court, Madurai.2. The dispute between the parties has been settled by filing a Settled Out of Court Memo, dated 08.12.2022, which reads as under:- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4 C.R.P.(MD)No.84 of 2023 ''Settled Out of Court Memo filed on the side of the plaintiff It is submitted that the plaintiff filed the suit against the 1st defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and permanent injunction against the 1st defendant before this Hon'ble Court. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff received the compromise amount from the 1st defendant. Now, the suit claim was settled by the plaintiff and the defendant amicably settled out of court and the court fee may be refunded to the plaintiff as per Rules. To that effect this memo is filed.''

The learned Additional Government Pleader had taken notice on behalf of the respondents. He stated that the survey had been scheduled on 30.03.2023/ tomorrow.2. Let the survey proceed. Let the petitioner also participate in the said survey and extend co-operation for conducting the survey.The Tahsildar may complete the survey with the help of the second respondent / Firka Surveyor, Thiruvadanai.3. No further orders are required in the Writ Petition.https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.6624 of 2023

das Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.3112 and 3557 of 2023 Dated: 28.03.2023 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

This Arbitration Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the award dated 25.03.2022 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator.2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has entered into Hypothecation-cum-loan Agreement with the respondent and borrowed a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- by virtue of Loan Agreement No. HP 9261 dated 26.02.2015 for the purchase of vehicle namely SCORPIO, bearing registration No. TN 73W 1333. The petitioner has admitted the fact about the disbursement of the said loan. As per the terms and conditions of the aforesaid agreement, the petitioner has to repay the total sum in the form of 36 equated monthly installments of Rs.18,500/-p.m. The petitioner further submitted that after the purchase of the said vehicle, the 1st respondent got the original RC book and gave promise to return it, but failed to issue the 2/28 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.592 of 2022 original RC book even after several repeated requests. The petitioner was regularly paying the monthly installments without default . In this case, the petitioner had stopped paying the EMIs from 26th EMI. When the petitioner approached the 1st respondent financial institution to close the loan, a person who was handling the above said loan had started demanding exorbitant repayment of amount. Subsequently, the petitioner offered to make Rs.1,50,000/- as One Time Settlement, hereinafter referred as OTS , but was refused by the 1st respondent and they demanded a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- for the OTS. Thereafter, the 1st respondent's authorized representative gave an offer to pay Rs. 1,95,000/- as OTS to settle the loan. So, by believing the words of the authorized representative the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.

This Arbitration Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the arbitral award dated 29.04.2015 passed by the Arbitrator.2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had entered into an Agreement dated 12.08.2012 with the respondent and availed financial assistance from the respondent to the tune of Rs.2,00,00,000/- for the production of Bilingual feature film “JK ENUM NANBANIN VAZHKAI” and the respondent had released the financial assistance in seven installments. The petitioner has admitted the fact about the disbursement of the said loan and on various dates, the petitioner had repaid Rs.1,15,00,000/- out of the total due of Rs.2,00,00,000/-. The petitioner had not released the film in any theatre or in the electronic media including satellite, etc. Thereafter, the petitioner requested the respondent to allow 2/29 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.286 of 2022 them to release the said film in DVD format. However, the respondent obtained an order of interim injunction dated 12.01.2015 in O.A.No.43 of 2015, restraining the petitioner from releasing the film in any format without settling the due amounts to the respondent. At this juncture, without realising the gravity of the situation, one of the distributors at Dharmapuri, had realeased the film in DVD format on 07.03.2015. Hence the petitioner without any other option, released the film in DVD format in other districts also.

Madras High Court - 2020