Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Limited v. M/S. EMPEE DISTILLERIES LTD
A/4636/2024 · 2025-07-02
C V Karthikeyan
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 78302 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 78302 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 A No. 4636 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-07-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN A No. 4636 of 2024 in C.S.No.28 of 2017 Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Limited Rep.by its, Senior Deputy General Manager-Accounts G.Samuthiram, No.7, Selva Street, Madurai Meenakshi Nagar, Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087 Applicant/Plaintiff Vs M/s. Empee Distilleries Ltd Rep. by its Managing Director, Having registered office at, No.72, Greams Road, Thousand Lights, Chennai 600 006. (Substituted as per order dated 24.08.2023 in A.No.4310 of 2023 Respondent/Defendant https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2 A No. 4636 of 2024 PRAYER This application filed to eschew the evidence of PW-1 namely, G.Samuthiram and permit to examine S.Rajesh as PW-1 and to mark suit documents in C.S.No.28 of 2017. For Applicant: Mr.G.Krishnakumar For Respondent: Mr.Avinash Krishnan Ravi ORDER This Application has been filed to eschew the evidence of PW-1 and permitting another witness to be examined as further witness on the side of the plaintiff. 2.In the affidavit filed in support of the Judges Summons, it had been contended that PW-1 G.Samuthiram, then Senior Deputy General Manager had been examined and he also marked Ex.P1 to P9 on 04.10.2018. The matter was then posted for cross examination of PW-1. However, he was not cross examined. The matter then got delayed owing to various reasons. The trial once again recommenced. PW-1 had left the office and therefore, permission is sought to eschew his evidence and to permit another witness to be examined as PW-1. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3 A No. 4636 of 2024 3.The problem with that would be, if the evidence is to be eschewed, not only the oral evidence would be eschewed but also the documents which had been marked would also be eschewed. That would not be appropriate. Therefore, let further witness on behalf of the plaintiff be examined. He could be termed as PW-2. He can file his proof affidavit in the same terms filed by PW-1 and he can additionally affirm the documents already marked as Exs.P1 to P9 and that he has knowledge about the same. 4.With the above observations, this Application stands disposed of. 02-07-2025 smv Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4 A No. 4636 of 2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5 A No. 4636 of 2024 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J. smv A No. 4636 of 2024 in C.S.No.28 of 2017
02-07-2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis