Allowed

Arun Rajkumar Fredrick v. M/S. Upasana Finance Limited

Madras HC4 Oct 2013A/4604/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this original civil jurisdiction order, the Master allowed the petitioner to retrieve original exhibits by substituting certified copies upon undertaking to produce the originals when required by the court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to return original exhibits A1 to A3 by substituting certified copies and undertaking to produce originals when required.

Arun Rajkumar Fredrick Vs M/S. Upasana Finance Limited — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2013

THE MASTER

A. 4604 of 2013

E.P.No. 60 of 1998

E.P.No. 60 of 2018:-

¶9

M/s. Upasana Finance Limited, Represented by its President Mr.S.Ramakrishnan, No,96/1, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. ... Petitioner / Decree Holder

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.M/s. Pasumai Irrigations Limited, No. 29, Police Commisioner's Office Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶12

... Respondent / Respondent

¶13

Mr.Anand P.Fredrick, No.12, Harleys Road, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.

¶14

... Respondents / Respondent

¶15

A. 4604 of 2013:-

¶16

Arun Rakjumar Fedrick, No.11, Harleys Road, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.

¶17

... Applicant / 3rd Party

¶18

Vs.

¶19

1.M/s. Upasana Finance Limited, Represented by its President Mr.S.Ramakrishnan, No,96/1, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. ... Respondent / Decree Holder

¶20

2.M/s. Pasumai Irrigations Limited, No. 29, Police Commisioner's Office Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondent / Judgment Debtor

¶21

Mr.Anand P.Fredrick, No.12, Harleys Road, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010. ... Respondents / Judgment Debtor

¶22

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct causing return

¶23

of the original documents Exhibit A1 and Exhibit A2 and EX A3 to the Applicant /

¶24

Applicant / 3rd Party herein in the above said Application.

¶25

This Application coming on this day before this court for hearing, The court

¶26

made the following order:-

¶27

Heard. PW1 cross examined regarding EX A1 to A3. Hence, the petitioner is

¶28

permitted to get back EX A1 to A3, by substituting Certified Copies and also giving

¶29

undertaking to furnish EX A1 to A3 whenever required by this court.

¶30

Sd./-MASTER

¶31

04/10/2013

¶32

//Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶33

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶34

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. EVK 27/12/2021

Arun Rajkumar Fredrick v. M/S. Upasana Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Rajkumar Fredrick v. M/S. Upasana Finance Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Muralidharan Vs

D.Venkateswara Rao Vs

M/S.Canadian Crystaline Water Vs S.M.Chakrapani and Another

R.Dharani Vs

M/S. Kotak Mahindra Bank Vs D Balasubramanian

Vs