Amit Shah meets Nitish Kumar over breakfast

Udupi, Dec 15: What was meant to be a post-pilgrimage gathering turned tragic in Padukere village of Brahmavar taluk, Udupi district, late Sunday night, when a clash among youths escalated into a fatal assault, leaving one man dead.

The victim has been identified as 30-year-old Santosh Mogaveera, a resident of Padukere.

According to preliminary information, the incident took place during a late-night drinking party involving a group of local youths who had recently returned after completing their pilgrimage to the Sabarimala shrine. An argument reportedly broke out among the group and soon escalated into a violent confrontation.

During the ensuing brawl, Santosh Mogaveera was allegedly assaulted and collapsed at the spot after sustaining serious injuries. He was rushed by local residents to a private hospital in Brahmavar, where doctors declared him dead.

On receiving information, senior police officials, including Brahmavar Circle Inspector Gopikrishna, Kota Police Sub-Inspector Praveen Kumar T, Station ASI Manthesh Jabagoudar, and head constables Pradeep and Ashok, visited the spot and conducted an inspection.

Police have taken four youths into custody in connection with the incident. A case has been registered at the Kota police station, and further investigation is underway to ascertain the exact sequence of events leading to the death.

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.