Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73905 (MAD)

S Sudhakar and 4 others v. Sri Narasus Coffee Company Private Limited

A/3018/2025 · 2025-07-24

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY A.No.3018 of 2025 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.203 of 2024 1. S. Sudhakar No.84, M.C.Road, Old Washermenpet, Chennai 600 021. 2. S.Dhinakar 3. M/s.T.M.Karuppiah Nadar Sons, Represented by its Partner S.Sudhakar, No.84, M.C.Road, Old Washermenpet, Chennai 600 021. 4. M/s.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods, No.10, N.N.Garden, 10th street, Chennai – 600 021, Represented by its Partner Mr.S.Sudhakar. 5. M/s.Shri Lakshmi Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd., No.9, N.N.Garden, 10th street, Chennai – 600 021, Represented by its Managing Director Mr.S.Sudhakar. ... Applicants/Plaintiffs -vs- 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Sri Narasu's Coffee Company Private Limited Represented by its Managing Director S.Srudheep Having its Registered Office at No.16, Court Road, Johnsonpet, Salem 636 007. And Having its Branch Office in Chennai at No.4, South Mada Street, Saha's Complex, Near Theppakulam, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. ... Respondent/Defendant Prayer: Application is filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules Read With Order VIII Rule 9 of the CPC, 1908, to permit the applicant to file replication to the written statement filed by the respondent. For Applicants : Mr.Madhan Babu for Mr. Rahul Balaji For Respondent : Mrs.S.Suba Shiny ORDER By this application, the plaintiffs seek permission to file a reply statement along with documents. In the affidavit in support of this application, it is stated that the defendant has raised defences contrary to the documents and that it has become necessary to file a reply statement in view thereof. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that redacted version of the unregistered partnership deed is being filed on account of the 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis confidential nature of the document. 2. Learned counsel for the defendant objects to the filing of the redacted version of the partnership deed on the ground that it is a public document. 3. Upon examining the reasons set out in the affidavit and on considering the submissions of learned counsel, sufficient cause is shown. Therefore, this application is allowed as prayed for. 24.07.2025 (1/3) kj SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis kj A.No.3018 of 2025 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.203 of 2024 24.07.2025 (1/3) 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis