TAMIL NADU NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL,

TIRUCHIRAPPALLI (TNNLS)

AND

TAMIL NADU STATE JUDICIAL ACADEMY (TNSJA)

Report Regarding
First 5-day Academic visit of Final Year students of TNNLS
to the High Court of Judicature at Madras

Tamilselvan R.S

BA0130070 - Vth Year

Period

Monday 19th February, 2018 to Friday, 23rd February, 2018

 Day 1 - 19.02.2018
Debt Recovery Tribunal and Debt recovery Appellate Tribunal

Summary Note
Black Day - NO REGULAR HEARING IN DRT AND DRAT

An Introduction

Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985 laid the foundation for the debt removal due to Bank
and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. In 1991, the Ministry of Finance set up Tiwari Committee, which
forms a two judicial authority called as Board for Industrial and Financial reconstruction and the
Appellate authority for industrial and financial reconstruction. In due course, it also proposed a new
legislative reform know as DRT Act, 1993. It gives importance to SME debt restructuring and the
corporate debt restructuring. Some of the highlights are as follows:

 DRT Tribunal would adjudicate the matter of and the auction off their properties causing
irreparable damages to borrowers. A Clear bar for the civil courts to try these debt issues as per
Section 35 of the Act.
 The Amending Notification of 2000 did bring in some amount rationalization in the jurisdiction
of the debts recovery tribunal, yet it was not sufficient to coax the big borrowers to acquiesce to
the jurisdiction of the debts recovery tribunal easily and further leads to enactment of
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act

Jurisdiction

DRT Act shall not be apply where the amount of the debt due to bank or financial institution or to
a consortium of the banks or financial institutions is less than 10 lakhs rupees or such other amount, being
not less than 1 lakh rupees, as the Central Government shall may, by notification, specify.

Cases Observed - State Bank of India versus Sivakanthan

Facts: The SBI filed a mortgage suit against the petitioners M/S Sivakanthan Modern Rice Mill and suit
subsequently moved to Debt Recovery Tribunal at Chennai.

2
Observations;

 The Counsel appearing on Behalf of the petitioners argued that the order passed by the recovery
officer is valid. Order was well within the jurisdictional ambit of the Recovery Officer.
 The Opponent Counsel argues that there is no proper jurisdictional ambit and further discussed the
nuances and clauses mentioned in the onetime settlement document
 Adjudicator- Questioning the onetime settlement document, and listed the matter on 28 Feb 2018.

3
 Day 2 - 20.02.2018
State Human Right Commission and Tamil Nadu Information Centre

Summary Note
Visited the State Human Right Commission [10.30 to 12.00 & 90 Minutes] and Tamil Nadu Information Centre
[12.30 to 2.00 & 90 Minutes]
State Human Right Commission
 The Tamil Nadu State Human Right Commission is one of the commissions across the country that has
been working efficiently since its establishment. The Governor on the recommendation of the committee
comprised to be appoints the Chairperson. The Committee consists of Chief Minister of Concerned
State, Leader of Opposition, Minister In-Charge of Home Department and the Speaker of Legislative
Assembly appoints Chairman and other judicial Commissioners.
 As per Section 12 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the every state commission is empower to
inquire and adjudicate the human rights violation or a negligent act of the public officials in performing
his /her public functions. Every citizen has a locus to file a case against any public servants if he/ she
violate the inherent human rights.
 State Human right Commission can entertain the case based on Suo motto action or the complaint filed
by the concerned Victims.
 One of the case where the Police officer in the rank of sub- Inspector was called upon in order to justify
his act against the accused. The Commission found that the accused falsely arrested under S.415 and
Section 120 IPC. The Commission acquitted the accused and suspends the SI for his act of malafide
intention as well as falsified motive
Tamil Nadu Information Commission
An Introduction
Right to Information is a fundamental right of every citizen and provides all the information about the
Government. The Right to Information Act (RTI) 2005 had come into force on 12th October, 2005. The Act
provides right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities
to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. The Act checks various
bodies and departments of the government, makes them accountable to the public, and minimizes corruption.
RTI Act is applicable to Public Authorities as defined under section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, 2005. The
information relating to any private body, which can be accessed by public authority under any other law for the
time being in force, is also within the purview of this Act.
4
 The Central Intelligence and Security agencies specified in the Second Schedule and Agencies specified
by the State Governments through Notification are excluded. The exclusion is not absolute and these
organizations have an obligation to provide information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights
violations. This information has been given as an introduction by the one the judicial officer - State Information
Commissioner.
Case Brief
R. Duraiswamy - SA 416/C/2018
The petitioner sent notice to TANUVAS University to get the employment information and personal
information about four plumbers. Information was not adequately given for all three lists. The information
commission held that list 1 and 2 employment information provided by company is satisfactory and the personal
details regarding education certificate, work experience certificate, community certificate need not be given
according to section8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005 as they are personal information. The appeal was dismissed.

T. Paul Manoharan SA 39/C/2018.

This case was regarding the information about management aided blind school, Palayankottai. The petitioner
asked details of sixteen teachers such as name, date of appointment, details about principal, subject details etc.
The school provided information to the petitioner but it did not give the details about the subject. The
commission held that management must provide the subject details of the teachers within one week.

Evening session

After coming back to the Academy, we had Dr. Nappinnai, who spoke to us on psychology and how it is
important in family disputes and discussion about the mind stress. She also spoke to us on how to this
profession affects us psychologically and a few techniques to get over stress. We had Ms. Vaigai, Senior
Advocate talk to us on Gender Justice and rights after the session on psychology. Ms. Vaigai spoke about the
lack of appropriate number of legislations for the protection of women and how they are influenced on a daily
basis. She concluded by saying that women protection is of utmost importance in today’s order due to the
increasing crimes against women. We had one last session by Mr. PH Arvindh Pandian, Additional Advocate
General and Senior Advocate on Litigation practice today. He told us from personal experience how one should
proceed to greater heights in the field of litigation and how to approach the profession post law school. It was
definitely an eye-opening session.

5
 Day 3 - 21.02.2018
National Company Law Tribunal and High Court Museum

Summary Note
Vested the National Company Law Tribunal at 10.00 to 1.00 and
High Court Museum from 2.00 to 3.30 Pm
National Company Law Tribunal - An Introduction
In order to reduce the burden of the High Court, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs has notified the
Constitution of NCLT and NCLAT as per Section 408 and 410 respectively. The recent verdict of the Supreme
Court in Union of India versus R. Gandhi upheld the validity of NCLT. On the very day third day of the
academic visit, the group of Nine students have observed the proceeding mainly observed the final verdict of
Marvel Green Energy Limited Versus Registrar of Companies. Certain peculiar features of NCLT;
 Section 409, the NCLT shall consist of the president and other judicial members who is qualified
to be the judge of High Court for the period of Five years posses powers to investigate the
company Accounts, Freezing of Assets and Conversion of Public company to private Company.
 It also posses powers in the matters relating to winding up of Companies, amalgamations,
restructuring mergers and acquisitions, Capital reduction and compromises.
 Appeal should be filed within 45 days from the date of NCLT Order. NCLAT order can be
appealed in the Supreme Court within 60 days from the NCLT Order.
CASE BRIEF
Marvel Green Energy Limited Versus Registrar of Companies
The Company was incorporated in 04.04.2012 in the State of Tamil Nadu and engaged the Solar energy
business production and generation. The Company did not submit any financial statement since its
incorporation. ROC as per Section 248 initiated a action against the Company and removed its name from the
register of Companies via order dated ROC/CHN/STK-7/1/2017.
The ROC stated that the company be directed to file a undertaking that the account of the company were not
used as means to transit tainted money during the period of demonetization.
The NCLT directed to restore the name of company in the Register of Companies and direct the Company to
file an affidavit regarding the account statements as well as pay Rs.10,000 to ROC.
High Court Museum
As one of the three Chartered High Courts of the Country, the High Court of Judicature at Madras, has a
glorious past. Various Judicial Institutions came to be established at various points of time right from the Great
Charter of the year 1600, issued by King George III. The Supreme Court of Judicature at Madras erected on
04.09.1801, gave place to the High Court of Judicature at Madras, established by Letters Patent issued in
6
exercise of the power conferred under the Indian High Courts Act,1861. And saw that first high court justice
and seal and document of while there given punished accused. And more use for that day made for us and
gather a lot of information how the court proceedings and seal and document are made. It is more useful as. The
High Court of Madras was actually opened on 15th August, 1862. Team of Nine visited the High Court
Museum in the evening and understood the historical past.

7
 Day 4 - 22.02.2018
High Court of Madras and Family Court

Summary Note

Visited the High Court of Madras at 10.30 [Court Halls 3,4,5]

Family court [Madras High Court Campus] from 1.00 to 3.00

Introduction

On the Fourth day of the Court visit, we were allocated to visit Court Halls 3, 4, 5 of the Madras High Court.
The Division Bench was presided by Hon’ble Justice Manikumar and Hon’ble Justice Mahadevan of the
Madras High Court. The matters were relating to Income tax issues, service matters and few Debt
Recovery applications. The High Court exercises Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution
which has an extended jurisdiction compared to that of the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Indian
Constitution. Also, the Madras High Court has superintendence over all the sub ordinate Courts in the State
under Article 227 of the constitution.

In a matter relating to WP 22033/2016, the Case was for issuance of writ of mandamus to appoint the
petitioners as Village Administrative Officers the vacancies accrued in SC/ST Category from Reserve List 3
dated 08.10.2014 of Village Administrative Officers published by the 2 and respondent. The Court on
considering the arguments of the petitioners that the Rejoinder is to be filed within a period of four weeks, the
Court granted time for the same. While hearing the other cases, one of the interesting observation was
pertaining to that of the Judge who particularly pointed out about preparation of daily matters. In a case where
the advocate appearing for defendants in a W.MP.NO.18828 & 18829/2016, the Junior advocate appearing who
was unprepared for his matter.

In another matter heard in an appeal against the W. P. No. 18978 of 2013, the Learned Counsel appearing for
the Petitioner against the Government argued on the merits of the case by stating that while passing the
impugned order ought to have given due consideration to the legal position enshrined in clause 4(6) of the
G.O.Ms.No.101 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 30.04.1997,where on
completion of three years of service as sanitary workers on consolidated pay, the government had the power to
examine the question whether they should be regularized or not. Since the government had not passed any order
for regularization of service ,the petitioner or the respondents had been working still as consolidated pay.

8
 DAY 5 - 23.02.2018

Labour Court and NDPS Court

Summary Note

Visited the Labour Court at 10.30 and NDPS at 1.00 Pm

Introduction

The Labour Courts deal with all types of disputes between employers and employees under the provisions of
Industrial Disputes Act and other Labour laws. The courts are presided judicial officers of the cadre of District
Judges. One Principal and three Additional Labour Court are functioning in Chennai. The territorial jurisdiction
covers nearby districts besides Chennai.

Cases handled come under Acts:

1. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

2. Cases under workmen compensation
3. Employees State Insurance Act
4. Factories Act Cases of Chennai City

Case Brief

R.Balakrishnan v S and S Industries and Enterprises Ltd.

The case was under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 section 2A(2) Dismissal, etc., of an individual workman to be
deemed to be an industrial dispute.- Where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches, or otherwise
terminates the services of an individual workman, any dispute or difference between that workman and his
employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be
deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other workman nor any union of workmen is a party
to the dispute. The court set aside the hearing. Advocates argued in the matter over the instability in the
dismissal procedure. The case is still pending. Next hearing set aside on march 1, 2018.

9
Ms. Sri Balaji Industries v Employees State Insurance Corporation

The case was preceded under Employees State Insurance Act, section 75(1) on matter which is in dispute
between a principal employer and the Corporation, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues
payable or recoverable under this Act. The court made enquiry the corporation counsel pleaded the dues yet to
be recovered on employees insurance stating various dates. The case is pending.

And move to NDPS court additional principal judge court District Judge Mr. Ayyappan taking the case and we
are sitting and watching the proceedings. He can explain the proceedings and subject matter details and it is
more useful for as. And what are question are necessary and unnecessary in trail time and cross examination etc.

10