Disposed

Mr.Abbas v. Mr.Younis Sultan

Madras HC24 Aug 2017CRP/2857/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition seeking to set aside the dismissal of an application to produce the original settlement deed. The court held the trial court was correct, noting marked copies are admissible and the petitioner is not entitled to compel production of the original.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition disposed of; connected misc. petition closed; no costs.

Mr.Abbas Vs Mr.Younis Sultan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :24.08.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶6

CRP.(PD).No.2857 of 2017
&
CMP.No.13477 of 2017
1.Mr.Abbas
2.Mr.Mubarak
...Petitioner
..Vs..
Mr.Younis Sultan ...Respondent

¶7

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed Under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order dated 17.06.2017 passed by the Learned District Munsif, Coonoor in I.A.No.51 of 2017 in O.S.No.67 of 2011.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Immanuel O R D E R

¶9

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the dismissal of a petition in I.A.No.51 of 2017 in O.S.No.67 of 2011 on the file of the

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

¶12

learned District Munsif, Coonoor, directing the plaintiff / respondent herein to produce the original settlement deed No.42/2011 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Coonoor. The trial Court has rightly dismissed the petition.

¶13

2.It is the grievance of the petitioners/defendants 1 & 2 that, in future, the Court, at its discretion, can reject the documents or may not rely on this.

¶14

3.It is the admitted case that the settlement deed, registered

¶15

document, xerox copy of the documents are marked before the Court as Exhibits, without any objection from the plaintiff's side. In that event, if the petitioner has any apprehension or it cannot be relied on

¶16

by the trial Court, he can steps under Order XIII Rule 3 of C.P.C. The petitioners can always get the certified copy of the registered settlement deed No.42/2011 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Coonoor. The petitioner is not entitled to compel the plaintiff to produce the original copy of Ex.B1, which is the settlement deed as it is marked without any objection.

¶17

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶18

¶19

4.Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not

¶20

find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court. Since the matter is pending from the year 2011, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶21

4.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
24.08.2017
kas
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To
The Learned District Munsif,
Coonoor.

¶22

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶23

¶24

M.GOVINDARAJ, J. kas

¶25

CRP.(PD).No.2857 of 2017
& CMP.No.13477 of 2017

¶26

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶27

¶28

24.08.2017

¶29

http://www.judis.nic.in

Mr.Abbas v. Mr.Younis Sultan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Abbas v. Mr.Younis Sultan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kandasamy Vs Mohanasundaram

A.Martin Vs C.Rani

P. Sundarambal Vs Kalpana Bhandari

R. Sanjeev Kumar Vs P. Murugesan Pillai

Kandasamy Vs the Arbitrator/Dist. Collector

Mrs.Devasena Vs Mr.Senthil Kumar