SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Mad) 660

A.S.VENKATACHALA MOORTHY
Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust and Another – Appellant
Versus
Kamal Dora – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:B. Sriram Panju, Sr. Advocate For B. Hari-Krishnan, R. Yashod Vardhan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court was as follows :

The respondents in I.A.No. 4706 of 1999 who are the defendants in the suit O.S. No. 37 of 1998 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Pondicherry are the petitioners herein.

2. The respondent herein/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S. 37 of 1998 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Pondicherry praying the Court to grant a decree declaring that the show cause-cum-charge sheet letter dated 6-1-1998 issued against the plaintiff by the defendants is unlawful, illegal and hence void ab initio and for various other reliefs.

3. In September 1999, the respondent took out two applications viz. I.A. Nos. 4705 and 4706 of 1999. The first one is to condone the delay in filing the list mentioned documents and receive the same. The second one is to condone the delay in filing the list of witnesses to be examined.

4. In the affidavit filed in support of the application in I.A. 4706 of 1999 it is stated that since the witnesses had to be contacted and their consent to come to the Court and give evidence had to be ascertained, he was not able to disclose the names of the witnesses in time and hence the delay occurred.

5. The petit

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top