Partly allowed¶25

V.Sreemanikandan v. v.Sreekant and 5 others

Madras HC14 Mar 2025A/894/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court order, 14-03-2025, K. Kumaresh Babu J., A.NO. 894 of 2025 in C.S.No.599 of 2019: application to receive additional documents in evidence; documents 1-8 admitted subject to proof and relevancy (no objection); document No.9 rejected as incomplete ('Page 1 of 2', second page missing) notwithstanding request to mark it as secondary evidence and objections that it was addressed to the first respondent/plaintiff; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to receive documents Nos.1 to 8 of the applicant's list, subject to proof and relevancy; document No.9 stands rejected as incomplete; no costs. ¶25

V.Sreemanikandan Vs v.Sreekant and 5 others — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A NO. 894 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-03-2025

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶4

A NO. 894 of 2025

¶5

¶6

C.S.No.599 of 2019

¶7

V.Sreemanikandan

¶8

I.D.4, Jain Sagarika, No.94, Satyadev Avenue, MRC Nagar, R.A.Puram, Ch-28

¶9

Applicant(s)

¶10

¶11

V.Sreekant and 5 others S/o.S.Vaithiyanathan, No.181/27, Kumbakonam Rd. Panruti, Cuddalore Dist. and 5 Others

¶12

Respondent(s)

¶13

For Applicant(s): Mr.O.P.Padmaprakash

¶14

For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Kannan Kumar (For R1)

¶15

Mr.R.Venkatraman For M/s.Tatva Legal (For R2 & R3)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This application has been filed to receive the documents mentioned hereunder in evidence in the above suit.

¶18

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

¶19

An objection has been taken with regard to Serial No.9 of the list of documents by raising a contention that the document is incomplete and secondly, the said document cannot be marked that too as a secondary evidence.

¶20

The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the list of documents were not located at the relevant point of time and only now he had been able to trace the said documents and therefore, he seeks permission of this Court to mark the said documents.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that they have no objection for receiving the documents listed in Serial Nos.1 to 8 subject to proof and relevancy. As regards the Serial No.9 document, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the said document does not belong to the respondents and the document is addressed to the first respondent/plaintiff and therefore, the same cannot be relied upon by the applicant and would further submit that the said document is incomplete document.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel on either side.

¶23

Since there is no objection to receive the document Nos. 1 to 8 of the List schedule documents, subject to proof and relevancy, the same is permitted to be received. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the

¶24

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

¶25

first respondent/plaintiff, document No.9 is an incomplete document. The said document itself reveals that it is Page 1 of 2 and there is no second page. Hence, the same stands rejected. No costs.

14-03-2025

kak