You may also like...
-
Madras high court feb 12th orders ஐகோர்ட் உத்தரவுகள் பிப் 12
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 13, 2022
-
The arguments of N Ramesh, Spl. Public Prosecutor, Directorate of Enforcement; Facts leading to the filing of these 2 impleading petitions by ED; The state police had registered 3 FIRs vide (i) Crime No.441/2015 (ii) Crime No. 298/2017 (iii) Crime No.344/2018 on the allegations of a ‘cash- for job scam. On competition of investigation, the final reports were filed by State Police which was taken cognizance by competent Court in (i) C.C.No. 24/2021 (ii) C.C.No.19/2020 (iii) C.C.No.25/2021. These three cases are pending trial before the learned Spl. Court for MLAs & MPs, Chennai, against Senthil Balaji & others.
by Sekar Reporter · Published October 19, 2022
-
Full order THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.(MD).No.15791 of 2020 and W.M.P(MD) No.13237 of 2020 T.Beril Lynora # 12.In view of the above, the very registration of the marriage by the second respondent is invalid in the eye of law. The second respondent failed in his duty by not scrutinizing the documents and ascertaining the age of the petitioner and the registration has taken place in a mechanical fashion. Unfortunately, the registration of the marriage by the second respondent is now standing in the way of the petitioner and it will very seriously affect her future prospects. The learned counsel for the third respondent has categorically submitted that the third respondent leaves it to the decision of the Court and the third respondent will abide by any decision. 13.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the very registration is bad in the eye of law, this Court is inclined to interfere with the registration of the marriage by the second respondent. Accordingly, the certificate of the registration of marriage issued by the second respondent dated 16.08.2017 in Marriage Sl.No.241/2017, is hereby quashed as illegal and opposed to law. 14.In view of quashing of the Marriage Certificate issued by the second respondent, the impugned rejection order passed by the first respondent dated 21.09.2020 is also hereby set aside. As a consequence, this Court holds that there was no marriage between the petitioner and the third respondent.
by Sekar Reporter · Published July 3, 2021