Disposed

Thyro Laboratories v. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd.

Madras HC11 Dec 2024A/4400/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The defendant sought leave to lead secondary evidence of income-tax returns, a quotation from K.K.Agency and an industries department certificate. Holding no prejudice would be caused to the plaintiff, the court permitted secondary evidence with liberty for the plaintiff to question admissibility, proof and relevance at cross-examination.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to lead secondary evidence of documents in Schedule to Judges Summons, with liberty to plaintiff to contest admissibility, proof and relevance in cross-examination.

Thyro Laboratories Vs Thyrocare Technologies… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A.No.4400 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11-12-2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

A.No.4400 of 2024 IN

¶7

C.S.No.57 of 2015

¶8

THYRO LABORATORIES 194 1 POONAMALEE HIGH ROAD KILPAUK CHENNAI 600 010

¶9

APPLICANT

¶10

¶11

THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR.A.SUNDARARAJU, D-37/1, TTC, MIDC, TURBHE, NAVI MUMBAI - 400 703.

¶12

RESPONDENT

¶13

For Applicant: NAVOD PRASANAN FOR M/S.MS BHARATH

For Respondent:

R.SUNILKUMAR

1/4

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

¶18

A.No.4400 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This application has been filed by the applicant/defendant

¶21

seeking leave of this Court to lead secondary evidence to prove the documents listed in paragraph No.4 of the affidavit and Schedule-A of the

¶22

Judges Summons.

¶23

Counter affidavit has also been filed by the

¶24

respondent/plaintiff in this application.

¶25

The documents for which leave is sought for to let in secondary evidence are (a)Income-tax returns of the defendant; (b)Quotation received by the defendant from K.K.Agency; and (c)Certificate granted by the Department of Industries and Commerce to the defendant. Though serious objections have been raised by the respondent/plaintiff as seen from their counter for allowing this application, this Court, after giving due consideration to the nature of documents filed by the applicant/defendant and the reasons contained in the affidavit filed in support of this application, is of the considered view that no prejudice will

¶26

2/4

¶27

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

¶28

A.No.4400 of 2024

¶29

be caused to the respondent/plaintiff if leave as sought for in this application is granted by this Court by granting liberty to the respondent/plaintiff to question the admissibility, proof and relevance of those document during the cross-examination of the defendant's witness.

¶30

Accordingly, this application is disposed of by granting permission to the applicant/defendant to lead secondary evidence in respect of the documents disclosed in the Schedule to the Judges Summons and by granting liberty to the respondent/plaintiff to cross-examine the defendant's witness with regard to the admissibility, proof and relevance of the documents for which permission has been granted by this Court through this order to let in secondary evidence.

11-12-2024

3/4

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

¶35

A.No.4400 of 2024

¶36

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J

¶37

¶38

A.No.4400 of 2024 IN C.S.No.57 of 2015

¶39

11.12.2024

¶40

4/4

¶41

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

Thyro Laboratories v. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thyro Laboratories v. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd.

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

Kovilpatti Lakshmi Roller Flour Mills Limited (Klfrm) Vs P.R.Srinivasan and Co., (Prs and Co)

Kovilpatti Lakshmi Roller Flour Mills Limited (Klfrm) Vs P.R.Srinivasan and Co., (Prs and Co)

A.Ruthramoorthy Trading as M/s. Bharani Engineering Work Vs P.Moorthy

Financiere Batteur Sas Vs Kalai Arasu trading as Spot Light

M/s Sangeetha Caterers And Consultants LLP Vs M/S Nellai Sangeethas

Mital Surendira Vs Malack Safaa Fathima and another