Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
K.Bharathi – Appellant
Versus
P.Nagan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defendant's application to summon income tax witness dismissed by trial court. (Para 1) |
| 2. parties argue necessity versus delay in summoning witness. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court deems witness examination necessary for income source proof. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. revision allowed, trial order set aside. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The defendant has filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2023 under Order 16 Rule 7(A)(1) of Civil Procedure Code to summon a witness from the Income Tax Department. The same was dismissed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant has filed the present revision.
2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/defendant submits that the defendant denied the entire transaction of the plaintiff including the source of income and to prove the same, he wants to examine the income tax officials and the trial Court failed to appreciate such details.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submits that there is no necessary to summon the Income Tax Department Officials to adduce evidence and the defendant has filed the petition to prolong the suit.
4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on rec
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
