Madras High Court Legal Updates & News

Madras High Court

Madras High Court Cancels “Original Choice” Trademark for Deceptive Similarity to “Officer’s Choice”

The Madras High Court ordered the removal of the trademark “Original Choice,” owned by John Distillers Ltd., from the Trademark Register, ruling that it was deceptively similar to “Officer’s Choice,” owned by Allied Blenders & Distillers.

The Bench observed that “Original Choice” lacked distinctiveness and was likely to cause confusion among consumers due to phonetic and visual resemblance.

The Court held that John Distillers’ adoption of the mark was not bona fide and amounted to passing off.

Upholding the validity of the “Officer’s Choice” registration, the Court reaffirmed that deceptive similarity undermines consumer protection and the integrity of trademark law.

[Allied Blenders & Distillers v John Distillers Ltd.]

22 hours ago

MananBookmark

Madras High Court Dismisses PIL Alleging Food Wastage on TV Show ‘Cooku with Comali'

The Madras High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation alleging food wastage on the Tamil reality show Cooku with Comali.

The bench of Chief Justice M.M. Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear for arguments.

The petitioner had sought an injunction against broadcasting the show, claiming it violated Articles 21, 47, and 51A(g) of the Constitution by endangering public health and nutritional security.

[Syed Alim H v Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and Ors.]

2 days ago

MamiraBookmark

Freedom Fighters’ Pension Not Comparable to Compassionate Employment Benefits: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court ruled that divorced daughters are entitled to receive their parents’ freedom fighters’ pension, rejecting the Centre’s contention that only unmarried, dependent daughters qualify.

Justice V. Lakshminarayanan held that the pension represents national gratitude for sacrifices made during the independence struggle and cannot be equated with compassionate appointment schemes.

Setting aside the Centre’s refusal to transfer the pension, the Court directed authorities to release it to the divorced daughter of the deceased freedom fighter, observing that entitlement flows from recognition of national service, not marital status.

[Thillai Lokanathan v. Deputy Secretary, MHA]

Read Order / 2 days ago

Manan GroverBookmark

Marriage Does Not Give Husband Absolute Power, and Wife’s Tolerance Is Not Consent to Abuse: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court held that marriage does not bestow a husband with unquestioned authority over his wife and that a woman’s endurance of marital difficulties cannot be construed as silent acceptance of mistreatment.

Justice L. Victoria Gowri observed that a husband’s obligation to ensure his wife’s comfort, safety, and dignity is intrinsic to the marital bond and not a secondary duty.

The Court underscored that mutual respect and equality are the cornerstones of marriage, rejecting patriarchal notions of spousal dominance in modern relationships.

Read Order / 4 days ago

YashashviBookmark

Madras High Court Allows Hindu Man to Use Public Ground in Christian-Majority Village

The Madras High Court criticised a Tahsildar’s refusal to permit a Hindu resident to hold Annadhanam (distribution of food) on a local public ground in a Christian-majority village.

Justice GR Swaminathan held that public land cannot be restricted to any one religious group, and excluding someone only on religious grounds violates Article 15 of the Constitution.

It emphasised secularism and inter-religious harmony, noting that a public ground must be open to all communities or none.

The Court set aside the Tahsildar's refusal to allow the Annadhanam on the grounds.

[K Rajamani V Joint Commr, HRCE]

Read Official order / 5 days ago

Manan GroverBookmark

Ganja Covers Only Flower or Fruit, Not Stem or Stalk: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court clarified that under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, the term ganja includes only the flower or fruit of the cannabis plant and excludes the stem or stalk.

The Court held that only these parts are relevant for determining commercial quantity. The clarification arose in appeals challenging convictions under the NDPS Act, where the appellants argued that the seized material did not meet the statutory definition.

The Court observed that since possession of ganja attracts severe penalties, law enforcement must ensure strict compliance with statutory essentials before prosecution.

[Ganesan v The State]

Read Details / 9 days ago

KhushaliBookmark

Aadhaar Correction Recognised as Fundamental Right; UIDAI Told to Expand Access: Madras High Court

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court held that correcting errors in Aadhaar data is both a statutory and fundamental right under Section 31 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016.

The Court directed the UIDAI to establish adequate infrastructure to make Aadhaar correction facilities accessible at the local level.

The Court observed that the right to receive benefits through Aadhaar necessarily includes the right to rectify its details, while allowing a petition by a widow whose pension was delayed due to mismatched Aadhaar data, and further directed the immediate correction of her records.

[Pushpam v UIDAI]

Read Order / 9 days ago

Manan GroverBookmark

Can Lack of Parliamentary Debate Be Valid Ground to Question Law? :Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has questioned whether the new criminal laws can be challenged solely on the ground of inadequate discussion or consultation in Parliament before enactment.

The Bench observed that insufficient deliberation does not, by itself, constitute a valid basis to assail legislative competence unless the enactment violates fundamental rights, exceeds legislative authority, or suffers from manifest arbitrariness.

The Court directed the petitioners to produce judicial precedents supporting their contention, cautioning that the petitions may otherwise be dismissed.

The matter pertains to challenges against the BNS, BNSS, and BSA. The pleas have been adjourned to the last week of November.

[Federation of Bar Associations v Union of India and Others]

10 days ago

Manan GroverBookmark

Grandparents May Execute Adoption Deed on Behalf of Unmarried Daughter With Her Consent: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court held that grandparents can validly execute an adoption deed on behalf of their unmarried daughter, provided she has consented to the adoption.

Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan clarified that the essence of adoption lies in ensuring the child’s welfare and permanent protection, not in procedural rigidity.

The case arose after the Sub-Registrar refused to issue a birth certificate naming the adoptive parent, citing a lack of an adoption order from the District Magistrate and claiming that the grandparents lacked authority.

The Court rejected this reasoning, observing that since the mother had concurred to the adoption, the execution of the deed by the grandparents was legally valid.

10 days ago

KhushaliBookmark

Madras High Court Orders ₹10 Lakh Compensation for False NDPS Implication

The Madras High Court, through Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan, held that a man had been falsely implicated under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and subjected to fabricated proceedings by police officers.

The Court observed that the officers had grossly violated due process and abused their authority by fabricating a charge of ganja possession to falsely incriminate the accused falsely.

Finding the prosecution to be malicious and unsupported by evidence, the Bench directed the Tamil Nadu Director General of Police to initiate a departmental inquiry against the erring officers.

The Court further ordered the State to pay ₹10 lakh as compensation to the victim for wrongful prosecution and harassment.

Read Details / 10 days ago

MamiraBookmark

Registration Authorities Must Collect Deficit Stamp Duty Before Returning Documents: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that registration authorities cannot return documents found to be insufficiently stamped without first collecting the deficit stamp duty.

The Bench observed that under the Indian Stamp Act and Registration Rules, every document presented for registration must be examined to verify the adequacy of the stamp duty paid.

The Court held that authorities must ensure full compliance before releasing documents, noting that proper stamp duty safeguards public revenue. Returning documents without collecting the deficit duty violates mandatory legal provisions and defeats the law’s purpose.

[Gita Power & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v Inspector General of Registration & Ors]

Read Order / 10 days ago

YashashviBookmark

Madras High Court Fines Police ₹10 Lakh for Fabricating Evidence

The Madras High Court imposed a ₹10 lakh penalty on three police officers for fabricating evidence and providing false testimony to secure a wrongful conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

The Court acquitted the accused, who had been convicted by a special court for allegedly possessing 24 kilograms of ganja, holding that the prosecution’s case was unreliable and unsupported by credible evidence.

Justice observed that the officers’ conduct amounted to a grave abuse of power and violated the accused’s constitutional right to a fair investigation and trial.

The penalty was directed to be recovered personally from the erring officials.

[Vignesh v State]

12 days ago

KhushaliBookmark

Madras High Court Quashes Customs Notice Restricting GST Collection

The Madras High Court quashed a notice issued by the Customs Department restraining Container Freight Stations (CFS) from collecting Goods and Services Tax (GST) on auctioned or uncleared cargo.

Justice N. Anand Venkatesh ruled that the Department had acted ultra vires its authority and that the impugned notice contravened the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The respondents contended that the directive unlawfully interfered with their statutory duty to collect GST under the Act, a position the Court upheld.

Concluding that the Customs Department lacked jurisdiction to issue such directions, the Court declared the notice wholly unsustainable in law.

[M/s. National Association of Container Freight Stations v. Joint Commissioner of Customs]

Read Order / 12 days ago

KhushaliBookmark

Denial of Fair Hearing Renders Arbitration Award Void: Madras High Court

The Bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh set aside a 2005 arbitral award passed by family elders in the Dadha business family dispute, holding that failure to afford a fair opportunity of hearing vitiates an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Court observed that “whatever may be the composition of the arbitral tribunal, following the principles of natural justice is non-negotiable.”

Finding that one party was denied a hearing before the final award, the Court ruled the award contrary to public policy and granted liberty to seek fresh arbitration before the same elders.

Read Order / 13 days ago

MamiraBookmark

Madras High Court Recognises Cryptocurrency as “Property” Under Indian Law

The Madras High Court, in a landmark ruling on October 25, held that cryptocurrency qualified as property under Indian law, granting it legal protection and ownership rights.

Justice N Anand Venkatesh ruled that although digital currencies were intangible and not legal tender, they possessed essential characteristics of property, including transferability and beneficial ownership.

The case arose after Rhutikumari’s 3,532 XRP tokens on WazirX were frozen following a 2024 cyberattack.

The Court directed Zanmai Labs to furnish a bank guarantee worth ₹9.56 lakh and restrained Zanmai Labs from redistributing or reallocating the investor’s assets, while expressly relying on Section 2(47A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which classifies cryptocurrencies as “virtual digital assets.”

[Rhutikumari v Zanmai Labs Pvt Ltd]

Read Order / 13 days ago

YashashviBookmark

Enroll Now!