You may also like...
-
justices M Sathyanarayanan and P Rajamanickam stated that the litigant has not submitted any materials to support his claim that only a Kallar community member should have been appointed in the above post. They also pointed out that it is a service portfolio case and not a PIL and the litigant, despite being a practising advocate and a registered political party member, had not paid attention to the fact. Criticising the litigant for wasting the court’s time, the judge dismissed the PIL and directed the litigant to pay Rs 10,000 as cost to any one Kallar Reclamation school of his choice within two weeks.
by Sekar Reporter · Published September 1, 2020
-
Police castigated for booking ‘whistleblowers’ Chennai, July 26 (PTI): The Madras High Court has unleashed a scathing attack on the investigating agency, in this case the police in Coimbatore city, for registering various cases and FIRs against a person, said to be a journalist and arresting him, even under the Goondas Act.
by Sekar Reporter · Published July 26, 2021
-
The Madras High Court recently held that the award of maintenance in matrimonial disputes should ordinarily be from the date of the application by the woman-claimant and not from the date of the order awarding maintenance (Mohamed Nisha Banu v. Mohamed Rafi and ors). An award from the date of the order can be made only if there are sufficient supporting reasons for the same, Justice K Murali Shankar ruled
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 22, 2021