V.R.F.Paul Raj v. K.Lakshmana Swamy
Case brief
What is this about?
The court allowed the receipt of additional documents subject to proof and relevancy but dismissed the interim application due to the ongoing trial in the main suit.
What did the court decide?
Additional documents allowed subject to proof and relevancy; Interim Application OA.444 of 2013 dismissed.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
A.587 of 2017
OA.444 of 2013
in
C.S.No.393 of 2013
C.S.No.393 of 2013
V.R.F. Paul Raj, S/o.Mr.V.M.Rajendran No.9, 8th Trust Cross Street, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028.
...Plaintiff/Applicant in
all applications and Civil Suit
vs
Mr.K.Lakshmana Swamy, S/o.Mr.N.V.Kamalanatha Mudaliyar, No.100, Nellikuppam Village, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District. ...Defendant/Respondent in all applications and Civil Suit
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether late-filed additional documents can be admitted when the time granted for recording evidence has expired.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
V.R.F. Paul Raj
- respondent
Mr.K.Lakshmana Swamy
Coram
N.Sathish Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court