Dismissed

Abraham Thomas v. Sunny Thomas

Madras HC16 Jul 2021A/1238/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a testamentary matter, the High Court of Madras dismissed an application challenging the admissibility of mechanically reproduced documents, ruling that such objections are to be raised during final arguments. The court directed the registry to list the main suit for continuation of evidence.

What did the court decide?

Application to eschew exhibits marked through Pw-1 is dismissed; liberty preserved for future arguments.

Abraham Thomas Vs Sunny Thomas — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

(TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2021

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

A.No.1238 of 2021 in TOS. No.26 of 2011

¶7

TOS. No.26 of 2011:

¶8

In the matter of the Indian Succession Act XXXIX of 1925, and In the matter of Last Will and Testament of K.A.ThomasDeceased.

¶9

Sunny Thomas Son of Late K.A.Thomas, Christian, aged about 57 years, Residence at No.5, Thomas Villa, Govindasamy Street, Pazhavanthangal, Chennai-600 114.

¶10

Dr.Shoba Thomas Wife of Mr.Simon Thomas and D/o.Late K.A.Thomas, Christian, aged about 44 years, residing at No.5, Thomas Villa, Govindasamy Street, Pazhavanthangal, Chennai-600 114. ..Petitioners/Plaintiff

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

1. Mr.Abraham Thomas ****(Since deceased),**

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

¶15

2. Mrs.Licy Thomas W/o.Abraham Thomas

¶16

3. Mrs.Shapana D/o.Abraham Thomas

¶17

4. Mrs.Shilpa D/o.Abraham Thomas,

¶18

All are residing at No.5, Thomas Villa, Govindasamy Street, Pazhavanthangal, Chennai-600 114.

¶19

(* Defendants 2 to 4 are brought on record L.R'S of the deceased 1**^st defendant as per order dated 2.1.2017 and extended on 25/1/2017 in A.No.6623 of 2016)

¶20

..Caveators/Defendants

¶21

A.No.1238 of 2021:

¶22

Mr.Abraham Thomas (Since deceased), S/o.Late K.A.Thomas

¶23

Mrs.Licy Thomas W/o.Abraham Thomas

¶24

Mrs.Shapna D/o.Abraham Thomas

¶25

Mrs.Shilpa D/o.Abraham Thomas,

¶26

All are residing at "Thomas Villa" No.5, Govindasamy Street, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Nanganallur, Chennai-600 114.

¶27

..Applicants/Defendants

¶28

¶29

-Vs-

¶30

Sunny Thomas

¶31

Son of Late K.A.Thomas, Christian, aged about 57 years, Residence at No.5, Thomas Villa, Govindasamy Street, Pazhavanthangal, Chennai-600 114.

¶32

Dr.Shoba Thomas Wife of Mr.Simon Thomas and D/o.Late K.A.Thomas, Christian, aged about 44 years, residing at No.5, Thomas Villa, Govindasamy Street, Pazhavanthangal, Chennai-600 114.

¶33

..Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶34

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to eschew the Ex.P.10 dated 14.07.2010, Ex.P.12 dated 25.08.2010, Ex.P.13 dated 29.11.2010 and Ex.P.14 dated 06.12.2012 marked through Pw1.

¶35

This application coming on this day before this court for hearing, the court made the following order:

¶36

The only objection of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant is that the documents, which are mechanically re-produced are not admissible. None of the documents are electronic records to enable the applicant to invoke the provisions under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. Therefore, the application itself is misconceived.

¶37

2.No doubt, an objection taken on the ground that the documents

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ marked are mechanically re-produced copies and therefore, they have not

¶39

admissible in evidence. Secondary evidence is admissible under certain

¶40

¶41

circumstances. It is for the Court to decide as to whether the respondent has

¶42

made out the reasons for accepting the secondary evidence. The said

¶43

question will be gone into at the time of disposal of the case and not now. Hence, this application is dismissed, reserving all the liberty to the applicant to raise all the objections at the time of final arguments in the Testamentary Original Suit.

¶44

3.Registry is directed to list the Testamentary Original Suit before

¶45

the learned Additional Master - I on 16.08.2021 for continuation of evidence. The learned Additional Master shall make an endeavour to complete the evidence by the end of September, 2021. Parties shall cooperate with the Master.

¶46

Sd/-R.S.M.J. 16.07.2021

¶47

//Certified to be a true copy//

¶48

Dated this the day of 2021

¶49

SU/19.07.2021 COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶50

From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.

¶51

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Abraham Thomas v. Sunny Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abraham Thomas v. Sunny Thomas

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

1.PRESTIGE Housware (Indi) Vs Span Electronics

Mrlyubarets Viktor Vs Owners and Parties Interested

Mr a.Narayanan Vs M/S Pandian Stores

The Official Liquidator, High Court Madras as the Liquidator Vs nil

M/S.Orhid Chemials and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs M/S.United Biotech Pvt.Ltd.

Dr.R.Ashokan Vs the Official Assignee