Daily Archive: December 2, 2025
Head notes cases mhc
kalaimagal saba case The order details for WA No. 472 of 2024 are as follows: – *Case:* WA No. 472 of 2024 – *Judges:* Honourable Mr. Justice M.S. Ramesh and Honourable Mr. Justice N....
Madras High Court* – *Judges:* N. Sathish Kumar and M. Jothiraman – *Parties:* S.M. Vetrivel (Petitioner) vs. The Secretary, Bar Council of India & Ors. (Respondents) – *Date of Order:* November 25, 2025 – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: Mr. T. Gowthaman, Senior Counsel for Mr. S. Deepika – For Respondents: Dr. G. Balu, Senior Panel Counsel for R2, R5, and R6; Mr. C.K. Chandrasekar for R4 – *Court Observation:* The court disposed of the petition, directing the Bar Council to take a decision as per law regarding reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities in future elections. The court clarified that this direction should not come in the way of conducting the ongoing election. The petitioner was given liberty to approach the High Powered Committee appointed by the Supreme Court for exemption from payment of nomination fee.
[02/12, 14:32] Sekarreporter: [02/12, 14:30] Sekarreporter: “Mr.Gowthaman, learned senior counsel would submit that the relief sought for by the petitioner in this petition is not to delay or stall the election, only the statutory...
[02/12, 14:25] Sekarreporter: *Madras High Court* – *Judge:* N. Sathish Kumar – *Parties:* M/s. Fnhn World Resorts India Private Limited (Petitioner) vs. The State of Tamil Nadu (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified (likely December 2, 2025) – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: M. Vijay Anand – For Respondent: Additional Advocate General J. Ravindran – *Court Observation:* The court directed the Tamil Nadu government to produce documents related to the tender process for conducting the 50th India Tourism and Industrial Fair at Chennai’s Island Grounds. The petitioner alleged that their bid was rejected on flaky grounds, despite their company having successfully conducted the event six times previously. The court adjourned the case to December 4, seeking further clarification on the tender process. [02/12, 14:25] Sekarreporter: 09/NSKJ/18 WP/47251/2025 (Gen. Misc.) M/S. FUN WORLD AND RESORTS INDIA PVT. LTD., VS THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND 4 OTHERS. M/S. M.VIJAY ANAND K.S.LEKHA SRI —————— Chennai
[02/12, 14:25] Sekarreporter: *Madras High Court* – *Judge:* N. Sathish Kumar – *Parties:* M/s. Fnhn World Resorts India Private Limited (Petitioner) vs. The State of Tamil Nadu (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified...
head note: *IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS* *WA No. 3250 of 2025* *V. Singaravelan vs. The Kattalai Thambiran & Ors.* *Date of Order: 11-11-2025* *Coram:* – Hon’ble Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar – Hon’ble Mr Justice Hemant Chandangoudar *Counsel:* – For Appellant: Mr. M. Baskar for Mr. K. B. Vivekanandhan – For Respondents: Mr. Kandhan Duraisami (for R1), Mr. S. Ravee Kumar, Government Pleader (Puducherry) (for R3 and R4) *Court Observation:* The Madras High Court directed that only one assistant, instead of two, can assist the Kattalai Thambiran in the internal administration of the temple, considering his advanced age and physical inability to manage the affairs. The court also clarified that this arrangement will continue until further orders or till the final disposal of the writ appeal.
[02/12, 14:11] Sekarreporter: [02/12, 14:11] Sekarreporter: “For Appellant : Mr.M.Baskar for Mr.K.B.Vivekanandhan” HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WA No. 3250 of 2025 AND CMP NO. 26740 OF...
*Madras High Court* – *Judge:* Jagadish Chandira – *Parties:* Murugesan (Petitioner/MLA, DMK) vs. The State (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: Not specified – For Respondent: Not specified – *Court Observation:* The court quashed the case against DMK MLA Murugesan, who was accused of distributing money to voters during the 2021 assembly elections. The court held that there was no evidence to link the petitioner to the alleged offence and that his name had been misused.
*Madras High Court* – *Judge:* Jagadish Chandira – *Parties:* Murugesan (Petitioner/MLA, DMK) vs. The State (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: Not specified – For Respondent: Not specified...
*Madras High Court* – *Judges:* Chief Justice M.M. Srivastava and Justice G. Arulmurugan – *Parties:* Rangarajan Narasimhan (Petitioner) vs. The State (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: Not specified – For Respondent: Additional Government Advocate Rajtilak – *Court Observation:* The court directed the police to respond to the petition within three weeks regarding the alleged attempt to steal gold and silver sculptures from the Kanchipuram Varadaraja Perumal Temple. The petitioner alleged that temple officials and priests were involved in the attempted theft, and a special investigation team should be formed to probe the matter. The police had initially closed the complaint, stating no theft was found to have occurred.
*Madras High Court* – *Judges:* Chief Justice M.M. Srivastava and Justice G. Arulmurugan – *Parties:* Rangarajan Narasimhan (Petitioner) vs. The State (Respondent) – *Date of Order:* Not specified – *Counsel:* – For Petitioner: Not...