![WhatsApp Image 2023-02-15 at 10.38.07 AM](https://chennaijusticelawacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WhatsApp-Image-2023-02-15-at-10.38.07-AM-1024x899.jpeg)
SUCCEED IN LAW
![BEST LAW COACHING](https://chennaijusticelawacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/IMG_0248-150x150.jpg)
We are here to fight against any violance with experience
Chennai Justice Law Academy is a legal coaching center in Tamilnadu where we have a greater vision for students and people in legal fraternity to excel in their law career. We train, coach and aid them to achieve academic as well as practical excellence in legal field.
We provide coaching for TNPSC & PJS Judicial service examination, CLAT Examination and NET(Law) Examination. One of the greatest significance of our academy is, we provide traditional classroom teaching space where students can interact and clarify all their doubts with the teachers. The teachers provide a very friendly and supportive environment. There is also online mode of teaching for the sake of convenience of students
Chennai Justice Law Academy is one the best coaching center for TNPSC civil Judge examination in Chennai
Chennai Justice Law Academy Videos
We feel very proud for our
great achievement
200+
STUDENTS
5+ BATCHES
Winning awards
Team members
KN SUBRAMANIAN VS INCOME TAX COMMISSIONER
The ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tax
Recovery officer II, Sadar, Nagpur Vs. Gangadhar Vishwanath Ranade (1998) 6 Supreme Court Cases 658 cannot be applied to the facts of thepresent case. Further, Tax Recovery officer is not required to declare the sale between the petitioner and the fourth respondent as invalid as the sale is void abinito. The petitioner has to institute a suit in a civil court to establish the right which he claims over the property in dispute.
The State v Muneeswaran and Others
The Madras High Court has directed the Judicial Magistrates to not accept the voluntary surrender petitions of accused persons when the Magistrate court does not have jurisdiction to try the case. The court made it clear that as per Section 167 of CrPC an accused had to be “forwarded” to the Magistrate by the police and only then the court could entertain a surrender petition filed by the accused.
Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that remand report and case diary are jurisdictional conditions for authorising detention under Section 167(2) as it allows the Magistrate to apply his mind anad effectively determine whether a case for remand is made out. Thus, in the court’s opinion, when an accused voluntarily surrenders, the remand, based on only the FIR copy is clearly illegal and without jurisdiction