539 Madras High Court judgments explained in plain English: what was decided, the law applied and why it matters. Page 22 of 23.
Madras High Court allows transfer of matrimonial case from Chengalpattu to Salem under Section 24 CPC, emphasizing convenience and absence of prejudice to respondent.
Madras High Court holds that magistrates lack power to order reinvestigation after negative final report under CrPC, emphasizing judicial restraint in criminal proceedings.
Madras High Court rules that Sub-Registrars cannot refuse document registration based on title disputes, reinforcing limited scope of scrutiny under Registration Act, 1908.
Madras High Court holds that refusal to register a sale deed on grounds of unapproved layout requires a speaking order and opportunity to be heard under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.
Madras High Court holds that writ of mandamus is maintainable to compel tahsildar to survey and demarcate land boundaries after unreasonable administrative delay.
Madras High Court directs authorities to consider prisoner transfer request on humanitarian grounds within four weeks, emphasizing procedural fairness under Article 226.
Madras High Court holds that revenue authorities must adjudicate land record correction requests on merits after hearing affected parties, not dismiss them summarily.
Madras High Court holds that district authorities must consider all objections to TASMAC shop reopenings alongside landlord representations, affirming procedural fairness under Article 226.
Madras High Court upholds arbitral award finding broker's squaring off illegal for lack of notice, reinforcing procedural compliance under Arbitration Act.
Madras High Court mandates that revenue officials conclude bribery inquiries within 12 weeks, reinforcing accountability and procedural urgency under Article 226.
Madras High Court holds that once a trademark is registered, unilateral cancellation without notice violates natural justice and statutory procedure under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Madras High Court sets aside arbitral award for patent illegality under Section 34(2)(a) of the Arbitration Act for failing to decide a framed issue on settlement of dues.
Madras High Court holds that land survey and demarcation must follow due process, including notice to neighbors and consideration of objections before action.
Madras High Court holds that writ of mandamus may issue to compel timely disposal of pending statutory appeals, reinforcing natural justice and administrative accountability.
Madras High Court mandates notice to neighboring landowners before survey and demarcation of disputed land, reinforcing procedural fairness under land revenue law.
Madras High Court holds that sale deeds executed during pendency of writ challenging discretionary allotments are void under Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act.
Madras High Court holds that property in name of female member of Hindu joint family is not presumed joint family property; burden of proof lies on claimants.
Madras High Court refuses to condone 301-day delay in filing writ appeal, holding that bureaucratic inertia is not sufficient cause under Limitation Act.
Madras High Court holds that unregistered Will suffices for settlement deed registration; clarifies legal position on succession rights and compulsory registration.
Madras High Court holds that civil courts retain inherent jurisdiction to grant interim injunctions even when arbitration clauses exist, provided relief is limited and just.
Madras High Court holds that land valuation under Land Acquisition Act must account for proximity to amenities and developmental potential, not just agricultural use.
Madras High Court directs Tahsildar to decide patta application within 12 weeks, affirming that undue administrative delay violates property rights under Article 300A.
Madras High Court holds that delay in cross-examination does not forfeit the right to examine a witness under Section 311 CrPC; conditional opportunity must be granted.
Madras High Court holds that indefinite travel restrictions in pending criminal cases violate personal liberty; permits pilgrimage travel subject to bond and undertaking.