The Supreme Court on Monday directed that Carnatic musician TM Krishna would not be recognized as the recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi award given by the Music Academy.
The Apex Court further restrained TM Krishna from projecting himself as the recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi award in the name of MS Subbulakshmi.
The Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti passed the interim order on a petition filed by V Shrinivasan, grandson of Bharat Ratna MS Subbulakshmi, challenging the bestowing of the prestigious Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award to musician TM Krishna.
It also issued notice to the respondent on the petition.
The Apex Court recorded in its order that it was mindful of the respect and honour commanded by MS Subbulakshmi across all spectrums.
Calling her one of the most distinguished singers, the Court said although she passed away in December 2004, her melodious voice continued to bring great joy to all her fans.
While the write-ups and the comments made by defendent no.4 (TM Krishna) were his way of conveying his respect for the singer, the plaintiff certainly felt that the words used by defendant no.4, to the say the least, were not in good taste, it noted.
The Apex Court saud that since the award has been already awarded on December 15, 2024, it would be appropriate to say that defendant no.4(TM Krishna) should not be recognised as a recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award.
He should also restrain from projecting himself as a recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award.
Mentioning the sponsors of the award, the top court of the country said that the Music Academy had a glorious legacy, particularly in their contribution to the music. Same was true about the reputation of The Hindu Group.
The interim order should not be seen as a reflection either on the sponsors of the award – the Music Academy or the Hindu Group. It should also not be seen as a reflection of the Court’s comment on the singing abilities of defendant no.4.
Filed through AoR Namit Saxena, the petition challenged the December 16 order of the Madras High Court.
On December 16, the Division Bench of the Madras High Court of Justice SS Sunthar and Justice P Dhanabal set aside a single-judge Bench order, which restrained The Hindu Group from presenting the award in the name of MS Subbulakshmi to Krishna.
The single-judge Bench of Justice G Jayachandran had passed an interim order last month in a suit filed by V Shrinivasan, saying that the conferment of the award was a violation of the legendary singer’s explicit wishes and mandate.
The single bench clarified that the Sangita Kalanidhi Award and cash prize could be granted to TM Krishna but not in the name of M S Subbulakshmi.
Shrinivasan had contended that TM Krishna had been making vile, vituperative and scandalous attacks on Subbulakshmi on social media.
He argued that conferring the award on Krishna, who had questioned the credibility of the late singer in the world of Carnatic music, should not be legally permitted as it would amount to conferring a Bhakti prize on an atheist.
He said that awards and recognitions instituted in the name of a person ought to be conferred on persons who shared common values.
As per Shrinivasan, Subbulakshmi had executed her last will and testament on October 30, 1997, in which she had specified that no trust, foundation or memorial of any kind should be made in her name and memory. Besides, no funds or donations should be collected for any of the above purposes.
The post appeared first on .
The Apex Court further restrained TM Krishna from projecting himself as the recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi award in the name of MS Subbulakshmi.
The Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti passed the interim order on a petition filed by V Shrinivasan, grandson of Bharat Ratna MS Subbulakshmi, challenging the bestowing of the prestigious Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award to musician TM Krishna.
It also issued notice to the respondent on the petition.
The Apex Court recorded in its order that it was mindful of the respect and honour commanded by MS Subbulakshmi across all spectrums.
Calling her one of the most distinguished singers, the Court said although she passed away in December 2004, her melodious voice continued to bring great joy to all her fans.
While the write-ups and the comments made by defendent no.4 (TM Krishna) were his way of conveying his respect for the singer, the plaintiff certainly felt that the words used by defendant no.4, to the say the least, were not in good taste, it noted.
The Apex Court saud that since the award has been already awarded on December 15, 2024, it would be appropriate to say that defendant no.4(TM Krishna) should not be recognised as a recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award.
He should also restrain from projecting himself as a recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award.
Mentioning the sponsors of the award, the top court of the country said that the Music Academy had a glorious legacy, particularly in their contribution to the music. Same was true about the reputation of The Hindu Group.
The interim order should not be seen as a reflection either on the sponsors of the award – the Music Academy or the Hindu Group. It should also not be seen as a reflection of the Court’s comment on the singing abilities of defendant no.4.
Filed through AoR Namit Saxena, the petition challenged the December 16 order of the Madras High Court.
On December 16, the Division Bench of the Madras High Court of Justice SS Sunthar and Justice P Dhanabal set aside a single-judge Bench order, which restrained The Hindu Group from presenting the award in the name of MS Subbulakshmi to Krishna.
The single-judge Bench of Justice G Jayachandran had passed an interim order last month in a suit filed by V Shrinivasan, saying that the conferment of the award was a violation of the legendary singer’s explicit wishes and mandate.
The single bench clarified that the Sangita Kalanidhi Award and cash prize could be granted to TM Krishna but not in the name of M S Subbulakshmi.
Shrinivasan had contended that TM Krishna had been making vile, vituperative and scandalous attacks on Subbulakshmi on social media.
He argued that conferring the award on Krishna, who had questioned the credibility of the late singer in the world of Carnatic music, should not be legally permitted as it would amount to conferring a Bhakti prize on an atheist.
He said that awards and recognitions instituted in the name of a person ought to be conferred on persons who shared common values.
As per Shrinivasan, Subbulakshmi had executed her last will and testament on October 30, 1997, in which she had specified that no trust, foundation or memorial of any kind should be made in her name and memory. Besides, no funds or donations should be collected for any of the above purposes.
The post appeared first on .