New Education Policy 2019 Draft

Download Full

National Education Policy 2019 Points 2019

தேசிய கல்விக் ககொள்கக வகைவு 2019
சுருக்கம்
Download Full

HC On Criminality in Communication, while Exercising Freedom of Speech

Scroll to Download Full Order
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, in one of it's Orders on 09 July 2019, has stated the following, concerning criminality in communication, while exercising the freedom of speech. The court has observed that, the manner in which something is said or done is more important than what was actually said or done. "If the words spoken or written are couched in temperate, dignified, and mild language, and do not have the tendency to insult the feelings or the deepest religious convictions of any section of the people, penal consequences do not follow." the court held.

Further, with reference to the Supreme Court, the court observed that, a mere inciting of "feeling of one community or group without any reference to any other community or group cannot attract either of the two sections, viz., Section 153~A and Section 505 of the IPC.

Placing reliance over intentions than to an act, and on the wholeness of a book than to a few isolated passages,  the court observed that, "the effect of the words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of view." Here is an interesting reference to a phrase "Clapham omnibus" in English law, which has been reviewed by the UK Supreme Court. Ref: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus

The court in it's order, further states the following, with regard to what is freedom in Free speech and what is not, thus:
"It is true that free speech is the foundation of a democratic Society.  A free exchange of ideas, dissemination of information, without restraints, dissemination of knowledge, airing of different view points, debating and forming one-s own views and expressing them, are the basic ideas of a free Society.  This freedom alone makes it possible for people to formulate their own views and opinions on a proper basis and to exercise their social, economic and political rights in a free society in an informed manner.  Restraints on this right have been jealously watched by Courts.  However, Constitution itself prescribes for restrictions of the freedom of  speech and expression under Article 19(2).  It enables the legislature to impose restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression on eight grounds.  Some of the important grounds are sovereignty and  integrity of India, public order, decency and incitement to an offence.'

"Any speech which disrespects another citizen, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community is," the court warns "forbidden and becomes punishable under Indian Penal Code and various other laws."

Download Full Order

HC On Blank Cheque

Scroll to Download Full Order
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, in on Order dated 04 July 2019, has reaffirmed it's opinion that, in view of Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it's valid and legal for a person in possession of an incomplete instrument in material terms, to fill it up and put to use
Download Full Order

HC gives 8 Year Time To Pass Order on Minority Status

Scroll to Download Order

The High Court of Judicature at Madras, on 05 July 2019, in response to a Writ Petition praying to declare a School at Gopalapuram, Chennai 86 as a Linguistic Minority Institution, gave an Order directing the petitioner to make their

application through Chief Educational Officer,  on the reception of which the Principal Secretary to Government,

Education Department, shall consider and pass appropriate orders, "within a period of 8 years," from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Download Full Order

SC On Son of Appellant Prosecuting His Father

Scroll to Download Full Judgment
In a Judgment involving the management of Hamdard Laboratories, delivered on 09 July 2019, the Supreme Court has hoped that "the two groups will rise above their egos
and resolve their disputes amicably so that the establishment of
Hamdard by Hakim Hafiz Abdul Majid continues to prosper and to
charity as resolved by the Late Hakim Abdul Majid for the benefit of
the people of India."

It would not be a fair trial, the Supreme Court observed, if the Son of the Appellant prosecutes his father.

Download Full Judgment

SC: On Accounting Payment by Partners in Firm's Favour

Scroll to Download Full Judgment
The Supreme Court in one of it's Judgments dated 10 July 2019, has held that the High Court was right about stating that, "the
amount paid by the individual partners cannot be treated as the payment made by the firm..."

The dispute arouse in the allotment of shops, while the government was shifting a wholesale market to a new location, due to congestion.
Download Full Judgment

SC Directives on POCSO

Scroll to Download Full Judgment and TN Press Release (English & Tamil)
The Supreme Court, on 11 December 2018 has issued directions with regard to disclosure of identity of the victim of rape or child victims under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).
Download Full Judgment 

The Government of Tamil Nadu has made a Press Release on the Subject above.
Download Press Release
Download Tamil Version

TN Constituting Mental Health Review Boards

As mandated in section 73 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, Government of Tamil Nadu constituted thirteen (13) District Mental Health Review Boards.
It is noted that there is no vacancy for Psychologists, Sociologists, Counselers or Rehabilitation Specialists.
Download Press Release

It Makes A Great Difference To Serve in Defence

Scroll To Download Full Judgement
Unlike in Civil, service in defence is real different, to the limit that, no civil servant can equate. For instance, read more.

The Supreme Court of India, delivered a judgment on a petition of an Airman of IAF, against the decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal, which has declined to review it's initial decision.

However the Supreme Court, in it's Judgment had stated that, five years have elapsed since the Airman has joined the bank for a higher grade and that "No purpose will be served in directing the reinduction of
the appellant into the IAF save and except to subject him to disciplinary action."

Download Full Judgment

HC Declares Law Otiose and Land Acquisition Illegal

Scroll to Download Full Order
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, on 03 July 2019, declared it's Order in response to petitions praying to declare The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition Rehabilitation and
Resettlement (Tamil Nadu Amendment Act) 2014 (Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 2015) as ultra vires and to declarethe show cause notice dated 19.06.2018 issued by The Land Acqusition Officer and Revenue Division Officer, Ambattur Divisional @ Anna Nagar West (Extn) Chennai - 600 101, under sub- section (2) of the Section (3) of The Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purpose Act 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 10
of 1999) as null and void.

Besides, the court, with the consent of the petitioners also took up the writs challenging
a) Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 2015 by which Section 105-A was inserted into the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
b) The Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001; and
c) Tamil Nadu Industrial Purposes Act,1997.

In course, the court has declared that, "Article 254(1) by its operation rendered the impugned Tamil Nadu Legislations repugnant, and null and void, ...... and therefore the impugned Acts do not survive."

In order to revive these acts, the High Court required that, "the State must re-
enact these statutes, in accordance with Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India, and obtain the assent of the President."

"In view of the requirements of Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India, Section 105-A of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,   is virtually otiose", the court held.

Consequently, the court held all acquisitions made on or after 27 September 2013, under the three impugned enactments, as illegal, except to those acquisitions of which the purpose of acquisition is accomplished.
Download Full Order

HC Orders Govt to Disburse Scholarship Money Before Deadline

The High Court of Judicature at Madras on 27 June 2019, has ordered on Scholarship disbursement to the students belonging to SC/ST Community who joined B.E/B.Tech Courses under Management Quote during the academic year 2017-2018

The Court, has clarified that "G.O.Ms.No.52, cannot be given retrospective effect and it shall only apply for the candidates to join the courses during the academic year 2018-2019 and thereafter. The candidates who have already joined before the date of Government Order, should be reimbursed full fees fixed for the candidates joining under the Management quota.

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has filed the counter affidavit, wherein, he states that there was "some dispute regarding the date of joining, (due to which) they are not able to disperse the scholarship money to the respective candidates."

Stating that "the government was bound by the orders of the Court and cannot delay the payment any further." the court, has stated a deadline and has ordered that, "In any event, none of the candidates, who are entitled for the scholarship money shall be deprived of the same beyond 30.08.2019."
Download Full Order

SC: Principles on Admissibility and Maintainability of Review Applications

The Supreme Court, in a Judgment dated 02 July 2019, has restated the basic principles in which a Review Application could be entertained and also the instances when such application will not be maintainable.
Download Judgment

SC Cancels the Sale of Ancestral and Acquired Property by Parents

The Supreme Court on 01 July 2019, delivered a judgement on the appeal of a great grandson, whose father has, as a precondition to his Marraige with another, sold certain ancestral property, without any consideration, and the receiver has further sold the property to yet another.

The father in his deposition had stated
that he executed the Sale Deeds without any   monetary consideration since Respondent No.1 insisted on transfer of the suit property  in her name as a  pre-condition for marriage.

The Trial Court held that the suit property   was ancestral coparcenary property of the
father and the Appellant.

Respondent No.1 failed to prove that the father of the appellant had sold the suit
property to her for either legal necessity of
the family, or for the benefit of the estate.

"In the absence of any legal necessity, or
benefit to the estate of the joint Hindu family, the Sale Deeds dated were illegal, null and void" the court held.

Furthermore, are the following excerpts from the judgment:

"Under Mitakshara law, whenever a male   ancestor inherits any property from any of his paternal ancestors upto three degrees above him, then his male legal heirs upto three degrees below him, would get an equal right as coparceners in that property."

"After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, this position has undergone a
change. Post–1956, if a person inherits a self­-acquired property from his paternal
ancestors, the said property becomes his
self-acquired  property,  and  does  not   remain coparcenary property."

 "If succession opened under the old Hindu law, i.e. prior to  the commencement of the   Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the parties
would be governed by Mitakshara law. The property inherited by a male Hindu from his paternal male ancestor shall be
coparcenary property in his hands vis­à­vis
his male descendants upto three degrees
below him. The nature of property will
remain as coparcenary property even after
the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956."

"In the present case, the succession opened in1951 on the death of" the great grand father.. 

"It is settled law that the power of a Karta  to sell coparcenary property is subject to certain restrictions viz. the sale should be for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate. The onus for establishing the existence of legal necessity is on the alienee."

As a consequence, the Sale Deeds effected by Respondent 1 were "cancelled as being
illegal, null and void."

The father of the appellant "could not have sold the coparcenary suit property, in which the Appellant was a coparcener, by the aforesaid alleged Sale Deeds."

"The underlying principle of the doctrine of lis pendens is that if a property is transferred pendente lite, and the transferor is held to have no right or title in that property, the transferee will not have any title to the property."

Download Full Judgement

Property Acquired by a Member of Joint Family is Also a Joint Family Property

In a judgment delivered by the supreme Court of India, on 01 July 2019, is quoted of a trial court arriving on a conclusion based on the premise that, property acquired by
any member of the joint family would be presumed to be joint family property subject to the condition that the acquired property had to be such that it could have been acquired only by the aid of the family.

However, the Appellant has raised
formidable issues on facts as well as on law which ought to receive proper attention of the High Court, the Apex Court records.

The High Court will have to address the
grievance of the appellant that some of the
documents, which in the opinion of the
appellant are crucial have not been even
exhibited although the same were submitted during the trial, as noted in the written submissions filed by the appellant, the Apex Court has stated.

Download Judgement

Tamil Nadu GST Rules 2017

In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 2017), the Governor of Tamil Nadu has made the rules on the subject above.
Download TN GST Rules 2017