Dismissed

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., v. Uphar Cable Industries

Madras HC30 Jan 2024A/377/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applications filed under Order II Rule 1 of Insolvency Rules 1956 seeking permission to reopen and recall the respondent side witness were dismissed. The Court held that the reasons provided were general, unsupported, and overlooked the applicant's prior non-cooperation in completing witness examination.

What did the court decide?

Applications to reopen and recall witness dismissed.

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024

¶2

in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

Dated:08.01.2025

¶5

Coram:

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶7

Application(IP)Nos.377 & 378 of 2024

I.P.No.25 of 2014

A.No.377 of 2024:

Mukesh Kumar Jain HUF Now currently residing at: No.3, Gengu Reddy Road, Chennai 600 008.

¶12

.. Applicant/2^nd respondent/Debtor

¶13

/versus/

¶14

The Official Assignee, High Court, Madras.

¶15

..1^st Respondent/Applicant

¶16

Arjunlal Sunderdas (died) 23, Anderson Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 006.

¶17

.. Deceased Insolvent

¶18

A.No.378 of 2024:

¶19

1/5

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024

¶22

in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶23

Mukesh Kumar Jain HUF Now currently residing at: No.3, Gengu Reddy Road, Chennai 600 008.

¶24

Chennai 600 008. .. Applicant/2^nd respondent/Debtor /versus/ The Official Assignee, High Court, Madras. ..1^st Respondent/Applicant

¶25

Arjunlal Sunderdas (died) 23, Anderson Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 006. .. Deceased Insolvent

¶26

Prayer in A.No.377 of 2024: Application has been filed under Order II, Rule 1 of the Insolvency Rules 1956 read with Sections 7 of PTI Act, 1909, praying to permit the applicant to reopen the respondent side witness.

¶27

Prayer in A.No.378 of 2024: Application has been filed under Order II, Rule 1 of the Insolvency Rules 1956 read with Sections 7 of PTI Act, 1909, praying to permit the applicant to recall the respondent side witness.

¶28

Both applications:

¶29

For Applicant :Mr.S.Ananda Kumar For Respondent :MrK.V.Ananthakrushnan for the Official Assignee -----

¶30

COMMON ORDER

¶31

2/5

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024 in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶34

The applicant herein/the second respondent against whom the application for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest is pending for the past eight years. This Court on 19.09.2024 referred the matter to the Master for recording evidence. In spite of several opportunities, there was no progress except for the examination of the applicant/1^st respondent herein. After filing the proof affidavit on 05.10.2023, the applicant is dragging the matter without subjecting himself to cross examination and hence, the Master has closed the evidence and post the matter before this Court for further proceedings. At this juncture, the present applications are filed to reopen and recall the respondent side witness.

¶35

The reasons stated in the affidavits accompanying the

¶36

applications is very general in nature without any supportive documents. Although the applicant claims that due to health condition and surgery, he was not able to attend the Court, the adjudication of the Master clearly shows that there was a total non-cooperation on the part of the respondent/applicant in completing the examination of the witness. Hence, 3/5

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024

¶39

in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶40

this Court finds no merit in these applications. Therefore, these Applications

¶41

stand dismissed.

¶42

(Dr.G.J.J.) (C.V.K.J.) 08.01.2025

¶43

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. and C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

¶44

4/5

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024

¶47

in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶48

ari

¶49

A.(IP)Nos.377 and 378 of 2024 in I.P.No.25 of 2014

¶50

08.01.2025

¶51

5/5

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., v. Uphar Cable Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., v. Uphar Cable Industries

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

The Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu Vs Akbar Ali

Manonmani Vs Arumugam @ Isanovar

P.K.Sowmyanarayanan Vs P.K.Vijayasarathy and 2 others

G.N.Pandian Vs Brinda Muthuswamy

Nailesh K.Shah and 4 Others Vs Lalithkumar R.Shah and Another

Chandrakanth Vs C.Sunitha