Ex-judge to manage MGR’s properties

Justice MM Sundresh on dismissing the pleas moved by both MGR’s relatives as well as his late wife Janaki Ramachandran, held that the administrator is entitled to deal with the accounts, among other administrative activities of all the properties. He also directed the former judge to file a comprehensive report within a period of eight weeks on inspection of all the properties and the accounts. MGR had executed a registered will on 18 January 1987, appointing senior advocate NC Raghavachari, as an executor. The will was to the effect that after the executor’s demise, M Rajendran, (the husband of Janaki Ramachandran’s eldest niece) had to act as an executor. 

Thereafter, the will proceeds to state that after the life time of Rajendran, an executor will be appointed by the Court as per law. But following the demise of Rajendran, there has been a string of pleas moved by relatives of MGR’s wife Janaki Ramachandran, MGR’s brother’s son MC Chandran and Rajendran’s wife Dr Latha Rajendran seeking substitution, appointment and impleadment. Certain beneficiaries of MGR’s will had also moved court opposing the application filed by Latha Rajendran, seeking to be appointed as administrator. However, Justice Sundresh on dismissing all the pleas and on holding that this court does not want to go into the allegations and counter allegations, said “The applications filed are for substitution, appointment and impleadment of persons who are not connected to the will. They are neither beneficiaries nor executors. “Merely because the applicant’s husband was the executor or just being the son of the brother of the testator (MGR), no right is created for the appointment as an administrator or seek impleadment. After all an administrator is required to see to it the last wishes of the testator or compiled with in letter and spirit.”

CJI’s house trespass: Plea against inaction closed

The Madras High Court has closed a plea pertaining to non-action against trespass and criminal intimidation against a group of advocates who barged into the official residence of the Chief Justice of Madras High Court.

The first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, closed the plea based on CB-CID submission that a charge sheet in this regard has been filed at the Magistrate’s court. The bench also directed CB-CID to forward a copy of the charge sheet to Bar Council of India as well as the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. Elephant Rajendran, an advocate, had moved the plea seeking the Court’s intervention on the issue as no police action had come forth even after a year had lapsed since the case was registered. He had also submitted that neither the Bar Council of India (BCI) nor the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, which resorted to placing lawyers under suspension even on trivial issues had failed to act, he added. Pointing out that the trespassing tantamount to an attack on the judiciary itself, he had alleged that the reason behind the inaction was owing to the influence and interference of some members of BCI and the state Bar. Subsequently, on directions from the Court, the CB-CID had filed a status report on the case in a sealed cover. Allegations are rife, that the advocates who trespassed into the Chief Justice’s residence were hired for the purpose.