SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

SEKAR REPORTER Blog

Uncategorized

 by · Published November 25, 2025

Justice Victoria Gowri noted that as per Section 18A of the Schedules castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, the officers could not conduct a preliminary enquiry when an information disclosed offence under the Act. The court noted that the nature of the allegation did not dilute the duty of the police to register an FIR once the complaint disclosed a cognisable offence.

[24/11, 19:48] Sekarreporter: https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-sc-st-act-police-cannot-close-land-dispossession-complaint-civil-dispute-310994 [24/11, 19:48] Sekarreporter: The Madras High Court recently noted that the police could not refuse to register FIR based on complaint made by members belonging to Scheduled caste and Scheduled...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[24/11, 19:45] Sekarreporter: “The High Court of Madras, through its judgment dated 17.10.2025 in M/s Viterra B.V. v. M/s SKT Textile Mills1, held that a party which deliberately chooses not to participate in the arbitral proceedings cannot use its own default as a ground to resist enforcement under Section 48(1)(b) of the A&C Act and upheld the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award rendered under the International Cotton Association, Liverpool (“ICA”),” https://www.mondaq.com/india/arbitration-dispute-resolution/1708896/high-court-of-madras-held-that-deliberate-nonparticipation-cannot-defeat-the-enforcement-of-foreign-arbitral-award#:~:text=The%20High%20Court%20of,Cotton%20Association%2C%20Liverpool%20(%22ICA%22)%2C [24/11, 19:45] Sekarreporter: .

Uncategorized

 by · Published November 24, 2025

[24/11, 19:45] Sekarreporter: “The High Court of Madras, through its judgment dated 17.10.2025 in M/s Viterra B.V. v. M/s SKT Textile Mills1, held that a party which deliberately chooses not to participate in the arbitral proceedings cannot use its own default as a ground to resist enforcement under Section 48(1)(b) of the A&C Act and upheld the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award rendered under the International Cotton Association, Liverpool (“ICA”),” https://www.mondaq.com/india/arbitration-dispute-resolution/1708896/high-court-of-madras-held-that-deliberate-nonparticipation-cannot-defeat-the-enforcement-of-foreign-arbitral-award#:~:text=The%20High%20Court%20of,Cotton%20Association%2C%20Liverpool%20(%22ICA%22)%2C [24/11, 19:45] Sekarreporter: .

[24/11, 19:45] Sekarreporter: “The High Court of Madras, through its judgment dated 17.10.2025 in M/s Viterra B.V. v. M/s SKT Textile Mills1, held that a party which deliberately chooses not to participate in the...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[24/11, 19:39] Sekarreporter: “the SHOs/Inspectors of Police. The Court made it clear that, except for this portion, all other directions were to be scrupulously followed by the Director General of Police. The Court, thus, allowed the appeal, ordered that there would be no costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition. [State of T. N. v. Vijayarani, LPA No. 45 of 2025, decided on 19-11-2025] *Judgment authored by: Justice N. Sathish Kumar Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants: A. Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent: N. Palani Kumar” https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/11/24/mad-hc-disciplinary-action-against-sps-unjustified-io-failure-to-file-report/#:~:text=the%20SHOs/Inspectors,N.%20Palani%20Kumar [24/11, 19:39] Sekarreporter: 👍

Uncategorized

 by · Published November 24, 2025

[24/11, 19:39] Sekarreporter: “the SHOs/Inspectors of Police. The Court made it clear that, except for this portion, all other directions were to be scrupulously followed by the Director General of Police. The Court, thus, allowed the appeal, ordered that there would be no costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition. [State of T. N. v. Vijayarani, LPA No. 45 of 2025, decided on 19-11-2025] *Judgment authored by: Justice N. Sathish Kumar Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants: A. Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent: N. Palani Kumar” https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/11/24/mad-hc-disciplinary-action-against-sps-unjustified-io-failure-to-file-report/#:~:text=the%20SHOs/Inspectors,N.%20Palani%20Kumar [24/11, 19:39] Sekarreporter: 👍

[24/11, 19:39] Sekarreporter: “the SHOs/Inspectors of Police. The Court made it clear that, except for this portion, all other directions were to be scrupulously followed by the Director General of Police. The Court, thus,...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
[24/11, 19:31] Sekarreporter: “Justice P.B. Balaji, hearing a civil revision petition filed by the husband, modified the Family Court’s direction that required him to pay Rs.15,000 per month, fixing the amount at Rs. 10,000 instead.” https://lawbeat.in/news-updates/madras-high-court-slashes-maintenance-after-wifes-rs-1-lakh-pay-surfaces-1542050#:~:text=Justice%20P.B.%20Balaji%2C%20hearing%20a%20civil%20revision%20petition%20filed%20by%20the%20husband%2C%20modified%20the%20Family%20Court%E2%80%99s%20direction%20that%20required%20him%20to%20pay%20Rs.15%2C000%20per%20month%2C%20fixing%20the%20amount%20at%20Rs.%2010%2C000%20instead. [24/11, 19:31] Sekarreporter: 👍

Uncategorized

 by · Published November 24, 2025

[24/11, 19:31] Sekarreporter: “Justice P.B. Balaji, hearing a civil revision petition filed by the husband, modified the Family Court’s direction that required him to pay Rs.15,000 per month, fixing the amount at Rs. 10,000 instead.” https://lawbeat.in/news-updates/madras-high-court-slashes-maintenance-after-wifes-rs-1-lakh-pay-surfaces-1542050#:~:text=Justice%20P.B.%20Balaji%2C%20hearing%20a%20civil%20revision%20petition%20filed%20by%20the%20husband%2C%20modified%20the%20Family%20Court%E2%80%99s%20direction%20that%20required%20him%20to%20pay%20Rs.15%2C000%20per%20month%2C%20fixing%20the%20amount%20at%20Rs.%2010%2C000%20instead. [24/11, 19:31] Sekarreporter: 👍

[24/11, 19:31] Sekarreporter: “Justice P.B. Balaji, hearing a civil revision petition filed by the husband, modified the Family Court’s direction that required him to pay Rs.15,000 per month, fixing the amount at Rs. 10,000...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

Uncategorized

 by · Published November 24, 2025

the court smsj bench wondered if film financiers could claim such exorbitant interest. The court remarked that it had to be seen whether such a demand for exorbitant interest would be against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act 2003.

The Madras High Court, on Monday, stayed a single judge order directing actor Vishal to pay Rs. 30 crore due to the entertainment company Lyca Productions. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Exit mobile version