The single-judge court dismissed an application seeking leave to file a rejoinder. It held that subsequent events are immaterial to the court's conclusion as defendants had not filed their written statements.
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.No.4840 of 2021 in C.S.No.92 of 2020
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
This application has been filed by the applicant/plaintiff to permit him to file rejoinder in the above suit.
2 It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant/plaintiff there are subsequent events after filing of the suit, which are necessary to decide the suit claims and hence filed this application along with the rejoinder.
3 Endorsement made by the Registry shows that D1 and D2 have not filed their written statement. Further subsequent events after filing of the above suit need not be gone into by way of rejoinder, especially when the defendants have not filed written statement.
4 Under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to allow this application and the same is dismissed.
List the main suit on 19.04.2022
02.03.2022
cgi
1/2
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
cgi
A.No.4840 of 2021 in C.S.No.92 of 2020
02.03.2022
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is permitted to file a rejoinder in the suit when defendants have not filed written statements.
P.Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
