Skip to main content

History of the Madras High court

  

In exercise of the power conferred by Section 51(2) of the States Re-organisation Act, 1956, the Government of India issued the Madras High Court (Establishment of a Permanent Bench at Madurai) Order, 2004, which was notified on 06.7.2004 to come into effect on 24.7.2004.

By virtue of the said Order, a permanent Bench of the Madras High Court was directed to be established at Madurai, with not less than five Judges, as nominated by the Chief Justice, to sit there and exercise jurisdiction and powers in respect of cases arising in the Districts of Kanyakumari, Tirunelveli, Tuticorin, Madurai, Dindigul, Ramanathapuram, Virudhunagar, Sivaganga, Pudukottai, Thanjavur, Nagapattinam,Tiruchirapalli, Perambalur and Karur. Later, the jurisdiction over the Districts of Nagapattinam and Perambalur stood restored to the Principal Seat, vide a Corrigendum notified later.

After the Judicial bifurcation of Madurai into Madurai & Theni judicial Districts, in the year 2006, the number of Districts within the jurisdiction of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court became 13. Except the original jurisdiction, the Madurai Bench exercises jurisdiction in all the matters as in the case of the Principal Bench in Chennai.

The Madras High Court Bench at Madurai was inaugurated on Saturday, the 24th July of 2004 by Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.C. LAHOTI, Chief Justice of India and was presided over by Justice B.Subashan Reddy, the then Chief Justice of the Madras High Court.

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court consists of a ground and three floors with a total plinth area of 22,929 Sq.m. It houses all the Offices and Departments of the High Court Bench. The building, housing the Court Halls, is two storied with a ceiling height of 7.20m and other area of the building is four storied with a height of 3.60 m. The total plinth area of the building is 15209 Sq.m and it consists of 16 Court Halls and Judges’ chambers attached to Court Halls, Library, Conference Hall with Video Conferencing System, Projector, etc., 12 bungalows, VIP Guest House, Law Office Building, Lawyers Chambers’ Buildings, 9 shops, Staff Canteen, BSNL, Post Office, Indian Bank and Advocates Canteen, within the campus.

The air conditioning work and wall panelling of court halls and the Hon’ble Judges Chambers have been fully air conditioned with wall panelling and false ceiling etc.. The Court Halls have been provided with Public Address systems. Out of 12 Court Halls four major Court Halls have been furnished based on the model of Supreme Court of India and Delhi High Court. The four court halls have full dais with secondary dais for court officer and Personal Assistant Book Shelves, Cushion seats, barricades etc, the other 8 court halls have been furnished as per the court halls of High Court of Madras with a smaller single dais for Hon’ble Judge with other furniture such as cushion seats and barricading etc. Network connection has been given to all sections and head of offices . The Personal Assistant Section in the first floor is also fully air conditioned with false ceiling arrangements. Computer facility provided to departments. Landscaping has been done in front of the Administrative Block.

There is a ‘Kanmoi’ (tank) and it has in it a variety of fishes. Variety of birds like Peacock, Lesser whistling duck, spot billed Duck, Glossy Ibis, Yellow Bitten, etc., are living / visiting the Premises of the Madurai Bench.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more