Madras High Court has said that no case can be decided on the basis of dispute between father and son within Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK). The court can investigate this matter only in the context of the political party.
Actually, the founder of Pattali Makkal Katchi, S. Ramadoss had filed a suit in the Civil Court of Chennai to stop Anbumani Ramadoss from using the party’s name and symbol. The civil court did not consider his request to implead him in the case, so Pattali Makkal Katchi general secretary Vadivel Ravanan approached the Madras High Court to join the proceedings.
During the hearing of this case, the Madras High Court in the Civil Court in S. An interim stay was put on the hearing of the case filed by Ramdas. After this S. Ramdas filed a petition in the Madras High Court to lift the interim stay.
When the petition came up for hearing before Justice Tamilselvi, Vadivel Ravanan’s lawyer argued that S. Ramdas has filed the case claiming to be the leader of Pattali Makkal Katchi, hence he should also be made a party in the case.
During the hearing, the judge asked Anbumani Ramadoss and S. Ramdas’ lawyers were asked what they intended to do in the matter, given that the election schedule had already been announced.
The judge further said that disputes between father and son can be resolved at any time, hence the case cannot be decided on the basis of their personal differences. The Court said that the matter should be investigated only by referring to Pattali Makkal Katchi as a political party. In this context, the judge asked what objection could there be to making Vadivel Ravanan a party in the case.
Anbumani Ramadoss’s lawyer also requested that S. Another petition demanding some party related documents from Ramdas should be heard the next day. Granting the request, the judge directed that S. The interim stay on the hearing of the case filed by Ramadoss will continue and S. The hearing was adjourned till the next day to hear the arguments of Ramadoss, Anbumani Ramadoss and Vadivel Ravanan.
Also read:-
Demand to make LLB course four years instead of five years, Supreme Court will hear
