Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 229 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 238 NOMINAL INDEX Abimani v. Government of India and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 229 The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl. Aro Granite Industries Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 230 M/s.Axeon Marketing India v. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 2) and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 231 Krishna @ Krishnakumar v. The State,...
Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 229 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 238
NOMINAL INDEX
Abimani v. Government of India and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 229
The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl. Aro Granite Industries Ltd., 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 230
M/s.Axeon Marketing India v. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 2) and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 231
Krishna @ Krishnakumar v. The State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 232
M/s.Madurai - Kanyakumari Tollway Private Limited and others v. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 233
P Vikash Kumar v. A Mohandass, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 234
K.J. Vinod (Insolvency Professional) v. Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 235
Kayar Nisha and Another v. State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 236
J Eswaran v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 237
ICICI Securities Limited versus Kariabettan Sugumar, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 238
REPORT
Case Title: Abimani v. Government of India and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 229
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed seeking a direction to the Ministry of External Affairs to consider the issue of demanding a definite reformation of the United Nations Organisation (UNO).
A bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete termed the petition and the relief sought therein as 'misconceived' which fell "beyond the realm of the jurisdiction of the high court".
Essentially, the plea filed by one Abimani sought issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Ministry of External Affairs to consider the issue of demanding a 'definite reformation' of the United Nations Organisation (UNO) to get the 'respective due place' for India and 'stable world peace'.
Case Title: The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl. Aro Granite Industries Ltd.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 230
The Madras High Court has stated that the assessing authority is not bound by the appellate tribunal's observations in a De Novo assessment.
Justices Anita Sumanth and N. Senthilkumar opined that while concluding the assessment de novo, the assessing authority is not bound by the observations made by the first appellate authority.
Case Title: M/s.Axeon Marketing India v. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Group 2) and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 231
The Madras High Court has recently observed that the laws relating to the import of drugs would also apply to ayurvedic drugs. Highlighting the absence of proper application forms for the import license of ayurvedic drugs, the court suggested that the existing rules should be modified to prescribe standards.
Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that there was a strong public element involved in the import of drugs, and it was necessary to regulate non-allopathic medicines also, which could have heavy metal content. Thus, the court stressed the need to modify the existing statutes. It added that the Parliament could, in the alternative, prohibit the import of ayurvedic or other classes of drugs if necessary.
Madras High Court Grants Bail To Actors Krishna & Srikanth Booked For Consuming Drugs
Case Title: Krishna @ Krishnakumar v. The State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 232
The Madras High Court has granted bail to actors Krishna and Srikanth, who have been arrested in connection with offences under the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985.
Justice M Nirmal Kumar noted that the actors had purchased cocaine only for their personal use, which would attract Section 27 (Punishment for consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance) of NDPS Act. Since the offence under Section 27 was a bailable one, the court was inclined to grant bail.
Case Title: M/s.Madurai - Kanyakumari Tollway Private Limited and others v. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 233
The Madras High Court has restrained the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation from passing its buses through four toll plazas on the National Highway in Tamil Nadu over unpaid toll arrears.
While taking the extreme step, Justice Anand Venkatesh added that the court was aware of the consequences of such an order but it was necessary to “jolt” the officials, who would otherwise not take any effort to settle the dispute. The court added that the if the payments are kept on being delayed, it would escalate to astronomical proportions.
Apprehending the law and order problem that would arise as a result of the direction, the court also directed the Director General of Police to issue necessary instruction to the concerned jurisdictional police to prove sufficient police protection at the toll plazas. The court asked the police to ensure that no undue pressure is exerted on the Toll Plazas to permit the buses to ply through.
Case Title: P Vikash Kumar v. A Mohandass
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 234
The Madras High Court has sentenced an advocate to 4 months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000 for disobeying and violating its orders.
Justice N Satish Kumar noted that a fine alone would not meet the ends of justice and thus decided to sentence the lawyer to 4 months' imprisonment. The court thus directed the Registry to issue a necessary warrant and directed the lawyer to be detained in civil prison. Noting that the lawyer had also failed to appear before the court in the previous hearing, the court was not inclined to suspend the sentence.
The court passed the order on a contempt petition filed by one Vikash Kumar, highlighting that the lawyer, Advocate A Mohandass, had breached an undertaking given by him before the court to vacate the premises that he had been encroaching upon.
NCLT Is Bound To Appoint IRP Proposed By Corporate Debtor: Madras High Court
Case Title: K.J. Vinod (Insolvency Professional) v. Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 235
The Madras High Court on Monday held that the suggestions of the financial creditor, operational creditor, or corporate debtor with regard to the appointment of the IRP are liable to be accepted.
While hearing a writ petition challenging the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai, the Madras High Court interpreted Sections 10 and 16 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The petition was filed challenging the appointment of the IRP, which deviated from the name proposed by the corporate debtor.
The bench noted that the combined reading of Sections 10(3)(b) and 16(2) of the Code lays down that the IBBI board is bound to accept the name suggested by the financial creditor or corporate debtor.
Case Title: Kayar Nisha and Another v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 236
The Madras High Court has reduced the sentence imposed on two women who had admonished a teen girl for having a relationship with their nephew, eventually leading to the girl's suicide.
While the court upheld the conviction, Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was inclined to reduce the sentence imposed on the women, noting the mitigating factors. The court noted the background of the women, and opined that their behaviour stemmed from an internalised misogyny which was a product of the male-dominated society. The court added that it was the society's mindset that had prompted the women to question the girl for having a relationship, instead of admonishing their nephew.
Case Title: J Eswaran v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 237
The Madras High Court recently observed that protests should not be conducted at the whims and fancies of political parties.
Justice B. Pugalendhi highlighted that political parties have a responsibility towards the general public who would be affected by the protests. The court added that the right to protest should not affect the right of the general public who are not associated with the protests.
The court also highlighted that the right to protest did not give a right to cause inconvenience to the public, and such right should not be used to cause irritation and disharmony. The court added that though protests could be carried out public places, its purpose should not be forgotten.
Case Title: ICICI Securities Limited versus Kariabettan Sugumar
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 238
The Madras High Court bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has held that once the petitioner chooses to file the appeal instead of directly approaching the Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the petitioner cannot wriggle out of the two-tier arbitration, by stating that they were not given an opportunity by the Appellate Tribunal to prosecute the appeal on grounds of limitation.
Two-tier arbitration refers to a process where a dissatisfied party can file an appeal in the Appellate Tribunal.
Additionally, the court held that ignorance of the law is no excuse, and the petitioner cannot claim that they were not put on notice by the Appellate Tribunal about the fact that their appeal is barred by limitation.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
While hearing a suo motu case intiated against former Minister Ponmudi for his remarks against Vaishnavism, Saivism and women, the Madras High Court on Tuesday orally said that nowdays politicians feel that sky is the limit under Article 19 of the Constitution and that they must realise that the country is not meant for politicians alone but for every person.
On being informed that complaints against Ponmudi have been closed, the court remarked that if any aggrieved person says that they were not served a notice before closing the complaint the court will come down heavily on the authorities.
It further said that while everyone is picking the mic and stating things as if they are the 'King', the court will not watch and tolerate the same.
Case Title: AP International v M/s Tarc Studio LLP And Another
Case No: CS (Comm Div) 168 of 2025
The Madras High Court has issued notice on a plea claiming that the scenes from Rajnikanth starrer “Chandramukhi” movie had been used unauthorisedly in Actor Nayanthara's documentary “Nayanthara: Beyond the fairytale”.
Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy issued notices to Tarc Studio LLP and Netflix Entertainment Services India LLP, returnable by 2 weeks.
Case Title: E Marees Kumar v. The Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu and Others
Case No: WP(MD) 17949 of 2025
The Madras High Court was on Tuesday informed that report of the District Judge, appointed by it to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the death of a 29-year-old temple guard in Sivaganga, revealed that the case was one of custodial torture and custodial death.
Noting that the State government has already transferred the probe to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete directed the Union Government to appoint an investigating officer within a week and directed that the chargesheet be filed as soon as possible, by August 20.
The Court also directed the investigating officer to collect all the material evidence that were submitted to the Registrar (Judicial) at Madurai bench of the High Court and to conduct an effective investigation without any unduly delay.
It further ordered the Director General of Prosecution to ensure that the final postmortem report of the deceased is filed before the concerned court within one week.
Case Title: XXX v. The Union of India
Case No: WP-25017 of 2025
The Madras High Court has directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to take down, within 48 hours, the intimate photos and videos of a woman advocate which had been posted online by her partner without her consent.
Justice Anand Venkatesh directed the Ministry to take steps to take down the video within 48 hours and file a compliance report by July 14. The court suo motu impleaded the Director General of Police and decided to issue directions to all stakeholders to ensure that young women are not subjected to such trauma in the future. The court also directed the DGP to create awareness among officers to coordinate with the Meity and remove such images and videos as and when a complaint is registered.
The judge, who grew emotional during the hearing, also said that he would meet the young lawyer in his chambers. The court admired the strength and grit shown by her in fighting the stereotypes and approaching the court. The judge added that it was fortunate that the lady was a lawyer and had help from the legal community. The judge then wondered about the situation of other victims who suffered in silence without gathering the courage to fight.