In the High Court

‘Ensure mineral rules are upheld while allowing quarrying near  Kalyanapuram lake in Tiruvannamalai district’

Chennai: Tiruvannamalai Collector and authorities have been directed by the First Bench of the Madras High Court to ensure there is no contravention of TN Minor Mineral Concession (TNMMC) Rules, while allowing quarrying in the adjacent places of Kalyanapuram lake at Chethupattu taluk. The directive was given in a PIL petition from C Neelakandan of Kalyanapuram village, last week. Earlier, the Additional Government Pleader told the bench that applications have been received, but no permission granted for quarrying in the lake area. Recording the submission, the bench said the Collector and other authorities shall consider applications strictly in accordance with rules, including the restrictions contained in the TNMMC Rules. The petitioner said the lake has to be preserved as more than 11 villages are solely depending on it. According to TNMMC Rules, Section 36 stipulated that within 10 metres of village roads no quarrying should be carried out without permission of the Collector. However, one E Anandha Kumar of Selvi Earthmovers and Transport Private Limited, had suddenly begun levelling a 40 acre plot near the lake. A complaint was filed to the authority concerned on March 7, which did not evoke any response.

First Bench reverses single judge’s order favouring chennai container terminal in port traffic issue

Chennai: First Bench of the Madras High Court has reversed the orders of a single judge, which went against the Chennai Port Trust (CPT) and favoured the Chennai Container Terminal (CCT). In December 17, 2007, the CPT informed the CCT that the latter had failed to achieve the required percentage of non-trans shipment traffic as per the licence agreement and demanded `63.86 crore, after encashing the bank guarantee of `47.08. The dispute was referred to an arbitration tribunal, which in 2013 decided in favour of CCT and directed the CPT to return `63.86 crore. The CPT moved the Madras HC and a single judge on January 8, 2014 allowed the plea and held that the CPT was entitled to make a demand for non-achievement of output targets. Assailing this order, the CCT preferred the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the bench said the single judge had failed to appreciate the law relating to the setting aside of an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act, 1996. The single judge had sat in an appeal over the award, re-analysed the evidence and adopted minority interpretation out of two plausible interpretations of articles of contract, which is not permissible under Arbitration Act.

Plea from bank to sell granite blocks mortgaged by prp exports in madurai for loan amount rejected

Chennai: A division bench of the Madras High Court has rejected a plea from Indian Bank to sell the granite blocks mortgaged by PRP Exports in Madurai for loans obtained from the bank. When the granite worth `132 crore was already seized in connection with over 52 criminal cases pending against PRP Exports, the materials under hypothecation cannot be allowed to be sold by the bank, the bench said last week. According to Indian bank, the materials could be easily identified, valued and photographed. They can be sold to recover the loan value. If the goods are left exposed to sun and rain, its value is bound to deplete, which would cause loss to the bank. Opposing the plea, Additional Advocate-General submitted that as many as 52 criminal cases were registered in various police stations in Madurai against the company and associates. This apart, during the course of action, the IO had already seized the materials. Bank has no right over the property as it was case property with respect to various criminal investigation. It is the duty of the company to repay the loan and sale of granites at the instance of the bank, cannot be allowed. The bench then dismissed the bank’s petition.

Orders reserved on plea from pazha nedumaran

Chennai: Madras HC reserved orders on a plea from Tamilar Desiya Iyakkam leader Pazha Nedumaran challenging an order of the First Additional Sessions Judge, refusing to return books supporting separate Tamil Eelam that were seized by police. Nedumaran and others were arrested in 2002 for publishing books in support of Tamil Eelam and the books were confiscated by the State. Nedumaran and others were acquitted from the caselater and he filed a petition for return of seized books. As the sessions judge dismissed his petition in 2007, the appeal.