Negotiable Instruments: Exhaustive Coverage by Adv Roma Bhagat. Register Now!
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Shambasiv (n/a)     28 February 2009

A temporary bench of Madras High Court outside Tamilnadu

We all know that the lawyers in Tamilandu are boycotting courts from the past many days due to which litigants are put to great suffering and no effective business in being transacted.  

Our esteemed member, Shri.K.V.Dhananjay feels he has a solution during such contingencies and has sent a representation to the Honourable Prime Minister of India, seeking his intervention and to consider establishing a Temporary Bench of the Madras High Court outside the State of Tamil Nadu under these extraordinary circumstances in order that the High Court may transact its essential and urgent business and the Law in support thereof.

The copy of the representation is attached herewith. 

Share your thoughts on this issue.


 21 Replies

Rajendran Nallusamy (Advocate)     28 February 2009

Actaully once a Supreme Court Bnch was constituted outside Delhi in J & K.

See this:

The full-fledged High Court of Judicature for the Jammu and Kashmir State was established in the year 1928. Prior to the establishment of High Court of Judicature. The Ruler of the State (Maharaja) was the final authority in the administration of justice. In the year 1889, the British Government asked the then Ruler of the State, Maharaja Partap Singh to appoint a Council and the Judicial member of the Council exercised all the appellate powers both on civil and criminal side. The State having two provinces – Jammu and Kashmir, had chief judges exercising judicial authority but they acted under the superintendence and control  of the Law member of the Council. Later the Council was abolished  and a Minister designated  as Judge  of the High Court  was appointed  by the Ruler to decide judicial cases. In 1927 a new Constitution was sanctioned  by the then Ruler of the State and instead of Law Member, a Ministry in the Judicial Department was created.

Thereafter, in 1928, by virtue of Order No. 1 dated 26.3.1928, the High Court of Judicature  was established and for the first time the High Court  was to consist of The Chief Justice and two Judges. On 26.3.1928, the Maharaja appointed Lala Kanwar Sein as the First Chief Justice of the Court and Rai Bahadur Lala Bodh Raj Sawhney and Khan Sahib Aga Syed Hussain as Puisne Judges. The usual places of sitting of the High Court uses to be Jammu and Srinagar.

In 1939 the Ruler promulgated the Constitution Act of 1996 which incorporated the provisions of law relating to the High Court and conferred upon the High Court  a substantial measure of Independence. The High Court was invested with powers of superintendence and control over the Courts / District judiciary.

The 1996 (1939 A.D.) Act also constituted a 3 members Board of Judicial Advisers akin to the Privy Council in British India. The Board was to advise the Ruler  in the disposal of the civil and criminal appeals against the decisions of the High Court.

The Board of Judicial Advisers at the time of its abolition by the Constitution Act 1956 had 17 appeals pending before it. On request of the Chief Justice, the Government of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, constituted a Special Bench of the Supreme Court of India consisting of Justice Mehar Chand Mahajan, chief Justice of India, Justice S.R.Das and Justice Ghulam Hassan for disposing off the pending 17 appeals. The Bench heard the appeals in Srinagar and upheld the judgement of the High court in all the 17 appeals. It was a historical event, when a Bench of Supreme Court held sitting outside the place of seat at Delhi till date this is the sole instance. On 10.9.1943, Letters Patent was conferred on the High Court.

In 1954 vide Constitution Application Order of 1954, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was extended to the State of J&K. Under Art.32(2-A) of the Constitution of India, the State High Court was for the first time given power to issue writs for enforcement of the fundamental rights so far as they are applicable to the State of J&K. In 1957, by the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution Act, an independent judicial body with the High Court of Judicature at the top was created.

1 Like

M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     01 March 2009

When there is a break down of constitutional machinery in any State, the Governor of the State has to submit his report, based on which and on recommendations of the Cabinet the President's rule may be imposed  until restoration of the constitutional machinery is restored.  But in the present compelling political coalition era, we cannot expect any such acts.

M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     01 March 2009

The Supreme Court on the 1st day of hearing asked the Government of Tamil Nadu to submit an affidavit as to who instructed the police to enter the Madras High Court premises, but on the very next day of hearing inspite of repeated insistence by the advocates on this aspect, the SC maintain stoic silence and never took the govt of tamil nadu to task on this aspect. ??????!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 Like

M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     01 March 2009

The basic issue of on whose order the police entered the premises of Madras High Court, who ordered for lathi charge has not been answered.  These vital aspects has been put on back burner. Why the particulars are not furnished ?  To save whom these particulars are being concealed or withheld is a million dollar question. Until those vital aspects are answered the problem will not be resolved.

Anjali (IT)     02 March 2009

Yes, I was also quite shocked to notice that on next day supreme court never insisted the state government to answer the question for the person ordered the lathi charge. May be Supreme court also worried that Tamil Nadu police may go to supreme court lathi charge everyone inside. 

It is so sad that even High court judge was also lathi charged. TN police seems to be overpowered. As a civilian I do strongly support the lawyers in this issue.  

1 Like

kavi (lawyer)     02 March 2009

Dear learned friends.

 I am from tamil nadu only  All the drama here is due to politics and  for gain of some blach sheeps , Nearly  for four months  the coimbatore District work is not functioning . Merely we create bad name among litigants and public

M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     02 March 2009

Dear Friends,

The Tamil Nadu  Police Department has its own reputation and integrity and they dont dare to enter the High Court premises and carry out lathi charge.  They have done so on the instructions of their political masters, the ruling coalition.  It is reliably learnt that senior police officials after the violence when they met the Lordships of the Hon'ble Madras High Court have admitted this fact to the Lordships off the record, and pleaded their helplessness that they cannot come on record and say that they acted on the oral instructions of their political leaders . It is my firm belief that the Lordships of Supreme Court of on coming to know about this has issued an judicial order directing the Tamil Nadu Government to file an affidavit as to on whose order the police entered the high court premises and lathicharged the advocates.  I am not having any political leniency  but the manner in which the police have entered the premises of high court without any authority is highly condemnable.  It is threat to judicial independence.  What has happened today in  Madras High Court may happen in Supreme Court too, only then we will  understand.  Inaction on the Supreme Court may lead  and encourage such incidents in other high courts too.  It is sad that some friends of our fraternity outside the State of Tamil Nadu are discussing whether Chennai high court advocates are right in boycotting courts stating that boycotts are against the Supreme Court.

I am placing the following facts before our learned members : -

The very Supreme Court which declared bandh by political parties illegal has now taken a view that in a democratic set up bandhs cannot be termed as illegal. 

The Supreme Court has banned bull fighting (Jallikattu) in Tamil Nadu barbaric and within a week it lifted the ban and permitted the bull fight and now again they have banned it. 

The Supreme Court in the month of October 2008 has threatened the Tamil Nadu Government that they will forced to recommend for its dismissal has now stated that for dismissal of state government one has to approach the Governor. 

The Supreme Court on 1st day of hearing relating to violence in Madras High Court turned down the request from the Tamil Nadu Government for week's time for filing affidavit as to on whose orders the police entered the high court premises and lathicharged and directed to file them within 24 hours.

On the very next day to our suprise the Supreme Court maintained stoic silence inspite of repeated pleas by advocates regarding non-filing of the affidavit by the Government of Tamil Nadu arraying as to who directed the police to enter and lathi charge.

Im awaiting the views of my learned friends.

1 Like

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer)     02 March 2009

To establish a bench outside the state requires certain procedure to be followed  due to constitutional barriers.

V.Raghavan (Advocate Madras High Court)     03 March 2009

I fully agree the version of Mr.Piravi Perumal. The very lead question of the person directed to enter the police in the High Court premises is not taken care off by  the Supreme Court and it creates some imaginary thinkings  of safeguarding some important persons. Unlsess otherwise visiting and enquiring the advocates of Madras High Court the situation cannot be understood. The state Government is suppressing many facts and playing the divide and rule game within the advocates. The reason being some of the advocates are the supporters of some political parties. The hands of the Tamil Nadu State Govt  even reaches in the presmises of the Supreme Court.  The Advocates are not blaming the mere police action but to know on whose orders they acted so. The police who participated in the attacks do not know the  simple principle that they should not enter in to the court hall.  The attack was well planned by the Govt and the Police some times before the incident. They have arranged to mobilise and stock stones from outside(In the Madras High Court premises you cannot find such stones) and some of their men were mixed with the advocates side and they were initiated the stone pelting. Like wise the High Court Police Station incident burnt by somebody and not advocates. Taking advantages of the advocates boycotting for the Lankar issue and subsequent Subramaniyaswamy issue (this was also planned by some body )some miscreants entered into that and enjoyed the benefit. There are nearly 28000 advocates practising in the Madras High Court and nearly  110 courts are situated within the complex. Hence it is easy to plan for those who wanted this type of situation - they succeeded temporarily - advocates who are the scape goats and fighting for the justice. The whole tamil nadu and Pondicherry the advocates are not attending . But we are getting news from the outside of Chennai some of the ruling govt. supporting advocates with their political power are trying to attend the court but they are prevented. This intention of attending courts by some faction of advocates clearly indigates somepart in the incident by the ruling government. I am just briefing that our legal friends should understand the reason for obstaining from the courts by the Advocates of Tamil Nadu and not for meagre reasons. This situation may happen to anywhere in India like our friend Mr. Piravi Perumal's statement.

ESTHERPRIYA (Practising Advocate)     03 March 2009

I think that even the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also failed to consider the plea of the Advocates of Madras High Court. There is some kind of hindrance in their way to render justice.

I feel that the Tamil Nadu police officials will soon attack supreme court of India so that they can understand our advocates cries in Tamil Nadu


M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     03 March 2009

I fully agree with the views of Mr. Ragavan and MS. Padma Priya.  If such acts are taken seriously, the judiciary will have to pay a heavy price in future regarding the independence of judiciary.  The judiciary which acted with haste and seriousness apprached the Delhi HC, when the CIC directed the Registry to furnish information, has not shown that much of seriousness in the Madras High Court incidents.

M. PIRAVI PERUMAL (Advocate & Consumer Rights)     03 March 2009

CORRECTION : Kindly read the above text as follows " if such acts are not taken seriously ".  By mistake the word "not" has been deleted in the above text.

Manish Singh (Advocate)     03 March 2009

yeah i completely agree with my friends. the incident at Chennai HC was a real shocking one and could be termed as a black day in the history of india as well as of our judiciary. that was extremely shameful for our system ie executive and the legislature. the judiciary has been shown their standing as a pillar as in term of constitutionality that it is just a pillar which can be broken down by any other two pillars as ansd when they wish and in that event the judiciary shall have to keep mum like just an ordinary "junta" who ha s no right even if we call in this democracy even if it sounds that the India is made for us "We the People" and its us who govern  this country.

we will have to wake up if we  need to put all these things to end otherwise it shall be too late.

K.Ravichandren (Business)     03 March 2009

Thanks for all the friends who shared their views. We Madras High Court Advocates are in tense and are expecting the verdict of the Apex Court. That only can raise the decoram of the chartered High Court which went down on 19.2.09. Not all the advocates are too bad and wantonly obstaining themselves from the court. The trick games played by the state government should be exposed only by our continuous support till our version is rightly heared by the Apex court. We are waiting for the day that is on 6th of March 2009. Please wish us. 

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register