The Gulf Returness Educational Vs Dr.G.George

¶1

A. Nos. 2630 & 2631 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶6

A Nos. 2630 & 2631 of 2026 in C.S. No. 822 of 2014

¶7

The Gulf Returness Educational Society, Rep By Its Secretary Mrs. Annamma John, Aa-70, First Floor Second St, III Main Road, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-40.

¶8

..Applicant(s) in both

¶9

Vs

¶10

Dr.G.George

¶11

Mrs.Annamma George

¶12

Jacob George

¶13

George Jacob (3rd and 4 th respondents are withdrawn on 28.07.2025)

¶14

..Respondent(s) in both

¶15

PRAYER in A.No.2630 of 2026: To reopen the evidence so as to enable the Applicant/Plaintiff to recall the DW1 (George) for the purpose of cross examination him in the above case in C.S.No.822 of 2014.

¶16

PRAYER in A.No.2631 of 2026: To recall the DW1 (George) for the purpose of cross examination him in the above case in C.S.No.822 of 2014.

¶17

For Applicant : Mr.S.Nagarajan

¶18

For Respondents : M/s.AAV Partners for R1 & R2. Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan for R3 & R4.

¶19

__________ Page1 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

A. Nos. 2630 & 2631 of 2026

¶22

COMMON ORDER

¶23

These applications have been filed seeking to reopen the evidence to enable the applicant/plaintiff to recall DW1 (George) for the purpose of cross-examination in C.S.No.822 of 2014 and to recall DW1 (George) for the purpose of crossexamination in C.S.No.822 of 2014.

¶24

2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The respondents have no serious objection to allowing these applications, but submit that DW1 is aged about 90 years and that his evidence may be completed expeditiously. It is further submitted that the earlier evidence was recorded by Mr.Radhakrishnan, Advocate Commissioner, and that he may be appointed to record the further evidence.

¶25

3. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavits and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the age of DW1, these applications are allowed. The evidence is reopened and the applicant/plaintiff is permitted to recall DW1 for further cross-examination.

¶26

4.Accordingly, Mr.Radhakrishnan , learned counsel is appointed as

¶27

Advocate Commissioner to cross examine DW1 in the place subject to the convenience of Advocate Commissioner and record the evidence in accordance

¶28

Page2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

A. Nos. 2630 & 2631 of 2026

¶31

with law. The petitioner shall make all necessary arrangements for secretarial assistance and transportation for the Advocate Commissioner. The Registry is directed to do the needful so as to enable the Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence and mark the documents. The initial remuneration of the Advocate Commissioner is fixed at Rs. 30,000/-. The petitioner shall pay the Advocate Commissioner’s fee directly to the Advocate Commissioner. The Advocate Commissioner is further directed to record the evidence, without causing any unnecessary delay, having regard to the fact that the witness is an aged and sick person, and to file the recorded evidence along with a report of proceedings forthwith before this Court on 17.08.2026.

¶32

17.07.2026

¶33

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No kmm/ay

¶34

__________ Page3 of 4

¶35

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

¶36

A. Nos. 2630 & 2631 of 2026

¶37

DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.