Al Zahara Petrochemical Llc v. Lubecon Petro Products Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY in C.S.No.79 of 2011 In both Applications:

AL Zahara Petrochemical LLC, A limited liability company incorporated under the laws of Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.Radwan Mohamed Azam, Having its Head Office at Plot No.3449, 3233, Sajaa Industrial Estate, P.O.Box.No. 68694, Sharjah, U.A.E.

Also having its Corporate Office at Office No.204, Bank mili Iran Building, 2nd floor, Bank Street, Burdubai, P.O.Box No.49875, Dubai-UAE.

... Applicant/Plaintiff Vs.

1.M/s.Lubecon Petro Products Private Limited, A Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its branch office at No.887/12, 13th main road, J block, 1st street, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600 040 and 5 others ... Respondents/Defendants For Applicant/Plaintiff: Mr.A.Ganesh For R1/D1:Mr.K.S.Vaidhiyanathan for Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj 1/4

Common Prayer : Applications are filed under Order XIV Rule VIII of OS Rules Read With Order XVII Rule 18 of C.P.C. to reopen the evidence of the 1st defendant and recall D.W.1 Raja Anandan in C.S.No.79 of 2011.

For Applicant/Plaintiff: Mr.A.Ganesh For R1/D1:Mr.K.S.Vaidhiyanathan for Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj COMMON ORDER By these applications, the plaintiff seeks to reopen the evidence of the 1st defendant and recall D.W.1 for further examination. 2.These applications were filed after the evidence of the defendants' was closed by order dated 31.07.2024. In the affidavits filed in support of these applications, it is stated that the plaintiff's counsel cross-examined D.W.1 on two days and put 98 questions to the witness. He further stated that the cross-examination could not be concluded due to time constraint.

3.Learned counsel for the 1st defendant submits that extensive cross-examination was carried out.

2/4

4.From the averments in the affidavits in support of these applications, it is clear that the cross-examination of D.W.1 was not concluded. Therefore, in the interest of justice, these applications are liable to be allowed.

5.Therefore, these applications are allowed as prayed for. 26.02.2025 kj (1/2) 3/4

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.

Kj in C.S.No.79 of 2011 26.02.2025 (1/2) 4/4