Allowed

Icici Bank Limited and 2 others v. v.T.Impex Limited and 2 others

Madras HC12 Oct 2020A/2126/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Defendants sought to admit 13 documents during evidence recording under the classification that no new case was being introduced. The court allowed the documents on file subject to objections being recorded and originals being produced for comparison.

What did the court decide?

Documents permitted to be taken on file subject to recording objections and production of originals.

Icici Bank Limited and 2 others Vs v.T.Impex… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

A.No.2126 of 2020 in C.S.No.817 of 2014

¶2

A.No.2126 of 2020 in C.S.No.817 of 2014

¶3

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J,

¶4

The application has been filed by the defendants to receive additional documents. The matter is now at the stage of recording the evidence. It is actually posted for recording the evidence of the defendants. At this stage, this application has been filed seeking to produce 13 documents. A rough perusal of the list of documents, which are now sought to be produced show they are Credit Arrangements Letter issued by the defendants to the plaintiffs, Undertaking given by the first plaintiff pursuant to the loan transaction, the Balance Sheet of the first plaintiff, Statement of Accounts of the first plaintiff, Current Account Statements of the second plaintiff and a Certificate under the Banker's Book Evidence Act.

¶5

The learned counsel for the applicant / defendant insisted that these documents are related to the statements made ins the written statement already filed on behalf of the defendants, and that therefore a new case is not being introduced by way of these documents.

¶6

Insofar as the reason as to why the documents were not filed along with the written statement, it had been stated that when the proof affidavit was being prepared, it was noticed that the documents, through relevant, have not been filed alone with the written statement and that the reason is neither wilful nor wanton.

¶7

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶8

1/2

¶9

A.No.2126 of 2020 in C.S.No.817 of 2014

¶10

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.J,

¶11

rna

¶12

The documents will have to be tested with respect to their relevancy and admissibility during the course of trial. They would also have to be proved in the manner known to law.

¶13

Subject to the above conditions and if any objections are raised during the marking of documents, with a request to the Master recording the evidence to note down the objections and a further request to the learned counsels to address the objections at the time of advancing arguments in the main case, the documents are permitted to be taken on file.

¶14

This application is allowed.

¶15

However, it is also seen from the perusal of the list that all the

¶16

documents are photocopies. At the time of marking the documents the originals of all the documents will have to be produced for comparison and the copies of the documents can be marked after authentication if the originals are required for official purposes.

12.10.2020

(1/2)

rna

A.No.2126 of 2020 in C.S.No.817 of 2014

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

2/2

Icici Bank Limited and 2 others v. v.T.Impex Limited and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited and 2 others v. v.T.Impex Limited and 2 others

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

Dr.S.Vijaya Bharati and another Vs Mr.T.S.Ramalingam and another

Mr. Jeeva Vs Tamil Film Producers Council and 7 others

Amaravathi Restaurants Private Limited Vs Karaikudi Chettinad Restaurant

Sri Krishna Tiles and Potterie Vs Rasika Ranjani Sabha

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. Vs British Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.

Sree Gokulam Chit and Vs the Indian Overseas Bank