![Mhc today Hindu news 7/3, 08:20] sekarreporter1: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/hc-orders-for-adding-ampersand-between-film-title-bhanumathi-ramakrishna/article31975342.ece/amp/](http://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story Om Prakash senior advt
- Previous story Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, Judge,zoom meeting
Recent Posts
- The Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association was represented by Senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran, who was assisted by Mr. G. Mohana Krishnan, President of Madras High Court Advocates Association and N. Marappan, Chairman Bar Federation. The senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran appearing for MHAA submitted that there is an unrest among the members of the sub-ordinate judiciary over the mandatory e-filing system for past one month. The senior counsel contended though e-filing practice is implemented, there cannot be an entire ban or restriction over manual filing process. The Senior counsel relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court contended that when the State of Madhya Pradesh imposed a complete ban on production of bidi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interfered and held there cannot be an entire ban, but only reasonable restrictions. The senior counsel drawing parallels between the Supreme Court Judgement and the present mandatory e-filing system submitted that restricting manual filing in entirety would violate the rights of the advocates to practice law.
- Mukesh Reporter திருப்பரங்குன்றம் மலையில் உள்ள தீபத்தூணில் தீபமேற்ற வேண்டுமென்ற சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி ஜி.ஆர்.சுவாமிநாதன் தீர்ப்பை உறுதி செய்து, நீதிபதிகள் ஜி.ஜெயச்சந்திரன், கே.கே.ராமகிருஷ்ணன் ஆகியோர் தீர்ப்பளித்துள்ளனர்.
- Actor vijai case Jana nayagam film case senior advocate sathis parasaran going to argue before PT Asha judge/ 2.15 case posted. Censor certificate case against central govt
- [06/01, 12:45] Sekarreporter: 1. The First Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.M. Srivatsava, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Madras High Court and Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Arulmurugan heard a Writ Petition filed by the Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry challenging the mandatory e-filing implemented in the sub-ordinate judiciary. The Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association was represented by Senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran, who was assisted by Mr. G. Mohana Krishnan, President of Madras High Court Advocates Association and N. Marappan, Chairman Bar Federation. The senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran appearing for MHAA submitted that there is an unrest among the members of the sub-ordinate judiciary over the mandatory e-filing system for past one month. The senior counsel contended though e-filing practice is implemented, there cannot be an entire ban or restriction over manual filing process. The Senior counsel relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court contended that when the State of Madhya Pradesh imposed a complete ban on production of bidi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interfered and held there cannot be an entire ban, but only reasonable restrictions. The senior counsel drawing parallels between the Supreme Court Judgement and the present mandatory e-filing system submitted that restricting manual filing in entirety would violate the rights of the advocates to practice law. 2. The Hon’ble Chief Justice M.M. Srivatsava, on hearing the submission expressed that these issues between the Bar and the Administration of High Court can be given a quietus through mutual dialogues. The Chief Justice also said that senior counsel is representing the entire members of the Bar and that these issues should be given quietus through dialogue. Responding, the Senior counsel also concurred that mutual dialogues would also be beneficial. The Hon’ble Court considered the factual issues adjourned the matter to 19-01-2026 and opined to explore other modes to give quietus to the issue. [06/01, 12:45] Sekarreporter: 👍👍
- Actor vijai filim jananayagam case afteenoon pt asj j seek censor certificate
More
Recent Posts
- The Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association was represented by Senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran, who was assisted by Mr. G. Mohana Krishnan, President of Madras High Court Advocates Association and N. Marappan, Chairman Bar Federation. The senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran appearing for MHAA submitted that there is an unrest among the members of the sub-ordinate judiciary over the mandatory e-filing system for past one month. The senior counsel contended though e-filing practice is implemented, there cannot be an entire ban or restriction over manual filing process. The Senior counsel relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court contended that when the State of Madhya Pradesh imposed a complete ban on production of bidi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interfered and held there cannot be an entire ban, but only reasonable restrictions. The senior counsel drawing parallels between the Supreme Court Judgement and the present mandatory e-filing system submitted that restricting manual filing in entirety would violate the rights of the advocates to practice law.
- Mukesh Reporter திருப்பரங்குன்றம் மலையில் உள்ள தீபத்தூணில் தீபமேற்ற வேண்டுமென்ற சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி ஜி.ஆர்.சுவாமிநாதன் தீர்ப்பை உறுதி செய்து, நீதிபதிகள் ஜி.ஜெயச்சந்திரன், கே.கே.ராமகிருஷ்ணன் ஆகியோர் தீர்ப்பளித்துள்ளனர்.
- Actor vijai case Jana nayagam film case senior advocate sathis parasaran going to argue before PT Asha judge/ 2.15 case posted. Censor certificate case against central govt
- [06/01, 12:45] Sekarreporter: 1. The First Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.M. Srivatsava, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Madras High Court and Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Arulmurugan heard a Writ Petition filed by the Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry challenging the mandatory e-filing implemented in the sub-ordinate judiciary. The Madras High Court Advocates Association and the Federation of Bar Association was represented by Senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran, who was assisted by Mr. G. Mohana Krishnan, President of Madras High Court Advocates Association and N. Marappan, Chairman Bar Federation. The senior counsel Mr. S. Prabakaran appearing for MHAA submitted that there is an unrest among the members of the sub-ordinate judiciary over the mandatory e-filing system for past one month. The senior counsel contended though e-filing practice is implemented, there cannot be an entire ban or restriction over manual filing process. The Senior counsel relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court contended that when the State of Madhya Pradesh imposed a complete ban on production of bidi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interfered and held there cannot be an entire ban, but only reasonable restrictions. The senior counsel drawing parallels between the Supreme Court Judgement and the present mandatory e-filing system submitted that restricting manual filing in entirety would violate the rights of the advocates to practice law. 2. The Hon’ble Chief Justice M.M. Srivatsava, on hearing the submission expressed that these issues between the Bar and the Administration of High Court can be given a quietus through mutual dialogues. The Chief Justice also said that senior counsel is representing the entire members of the Bar and that these issues should be given quietus through dialogue. Responding, the Senior counsel also concurred that mutual dialogues would also be beneficial. The Hon’ble Court considered the factual issues adjourned the matter to 19-01-2026 and opined to explore other modes to give quietus to the issue. [06/01, 12:45] Sekarreporter: 👍👍
- Actor vijai filim jananayagam case afteenoon pt asj j seek censor certificate