Court allowed reopening of plaintiff's evidence and examination of a witness to produce documents, subject to payment of Rs.25,000 costs to respondent for delay, subjecting documents to objections on admissibility.
Reopening of plaintiff's evidence and examination of PW2 (Mr. M. Sathishwaran) subject to payment of Rs.25,000 costs.
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.1575 & 1577 of 2022 in C.S. No.676 of 2017
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J
These applications are filed to reopen the evidence of the plaintiff in
A.No.1577 of 2022 and to receive the documents described in the schedule to the judge's summons in A.No.1575 of 2022.
1/4
stated above, the suit was at the stage of oral arguments, when the present applications were filed. The respondent/defendant pointed out that these objections were raised in course of cross-examination. The said objection is not devoid of merit. At the same time, while deciding whether reasonable cause has been established, the overall circumstances should be taken into consideration. Unless the applicant is permitted to reopen evidence for purposes of bringing these documents on record, great prejudice would be caused to the applicant/plaintiff. The cross-examination took place in October 2021, when the respondent raised these objections. Therefore, the applicant could have produced these documents at least at that juncture. To that extent, the applicant is guilty of delay in the final disposal of the suit. Consequently, the applicant should be put on terms. Towards such end, the applicant is directed to pay costs of Rs.25,000/- to the respondent/defendant within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to payment of costs, these applications are allowed.
applicant is permitted to examine Mr.M.Sathishwaran as PW2. The respondent/defendant is permitted to file the statement of admission/denial in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis respect of these documents and the production of these documents is, needless
2/4
to say, subject to the objections of the respondent/defendant inter alia on grounds of admissibility, relevance and proof.
List on 08.06 .2022 for compliance and issuance of further
directions.
21.04.2022
kal
3/4
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J
kal
A.Nos.1575 & 1577 of 2022 in C.S. No.676 of 2017
21.04.2022
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff can reopen evidence to produce documents raised during cross-examination due to delay.
Whether the respondent's liability to pay costs can be discharged to permit reopening of evidence.
APPLICANT/PLAINTIFF
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
