Court allowed three applications to amend cause title, disallow evidence of a departed plaintiff Administrator, and permit a new authorized representative to testify.
Applications allowed to amend cause title, eschew PW1 evidence, and permit new authorized person to give evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
A.Nos.1368, 1369 and 1370 of 2022 in C.S.No.346 of 2017
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
It was submitted that the pleadings were completed in the above suit and
listed the matter before the learned Additional Master III for recording applicant/plaintiff's evidence. Erstwhile Administrator was examined on behalf
of the plaintiff foundation as PW1 and filed proof affidavit and marked documents as Exs.A1 to A17 and the respondent/defendant almost crossexamined PW1 on few hearings. Due to Covid-19 lockdown and restrictions, the case was not taken up for the two years. In the meanwhile, erstwhile Administrator Swami Eka had left the foundation for personal reasons. If a person after giving chief examination does not offer himself for crossexamination, his entire evidence cannot be taken into consideration.
2.It was further submitted that the above suit is pending for crossexamination of the plantiff's side evidence. Since PW1 had left the
1/4
organization, it is necessary that a substitute person has to enter the witness
stand to lead evidence.
3.According to the applicant, he is the present Authorized Representative
of the foundation who is authorized by way of Board Resolution of the
applicant/plaintiff's Trust dated 01.03.2022, he is the person to give evidence in
the above case.
4.Application No.1368 of 2022 has been filed to permit the
applicant/plaintiff to amend the long cause title, short cause title and statement
of addresses in the plaint in C.S.No.346 of 2017 by striking out the name of
Swami Eka.
5.Application No.1369 of 2022 has been filed to eschew the evidence of
PW1 i.e.Swami Eka in the above suit.
2/4
6.Application No.1370 of 2022 has been filed to permit the
applicant/plaintiffs authorized person to give evidence afresh on behalf the
plaintiff foundation as PW1 supplanting the erstwhile Administrator by name
Swami Eka as PW1.
7.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the
respondent.
8.Learned counsel for the respondent has no serious objection in allowing
these applications.
9.Having satisfied with the reasons stated in these affidavits filed in
support of these applications and considering the submission made by the
learned counsel for the applicant, this Court is inclined to allow these Applications. Accordingly, these applications are allowed.
3/4
V . BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
pam
10.Registry is directed to list the matter before the learned Additional
Master- III for recording further evidence.
13.04.2022
pam
A.Nos.1368, 1370 and 1369 of 2022 in C.S.No.346 of 2017
4/4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to permit the applicant/plaintiff to amend the cause title and statement of addresses by striking out the name of the erstwhile Administrator.
Whether to eschew the evidence of the erstwhile Administrator (PW1) who has left the plaintiff foundation.
Whether to permit a new authorized representative to give evidence afresh on behalf of the plaintiff foundation.
Applicant
Respondent
V BHAHANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
