Sp.Alagappa And Another v. M. Saroja And 4 Others

A.No.2743 of 2024 in Tr.C.S.No.148 of 2021 and C.S.No.329 of 2019 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

This application has been filed to receive additional documents on the side of the plaintiffs as morefully listed in the schedule hereto.

2. The documents listed in the schedule to the Judges summons are the letters issued by late Subramanian to SP Lakshmanan who are brothers and the copies of remittance slip of the Madras Housing Board, the certificates issued by the Revenue Department, Corporation of Madras, the property tax collection receipt issued by the Corporation of Madras and another letter issued by SP Arunachalam to SP Lakshmanan who are also brothers.

3. The learned counsel for the defendants raised objections by stating that the documents reflected in the Judges summons are only photocopies and the photocopies of the documents are secondary evidence and unless they pass threshold of necessary reasons being advanced, they cannot be marked as additional documents.

4. The objections relating to marking of photocopies can be dealt at the time when the documents are produced to be marked as Exhibits. While examining the witnesses, they have to state why the secondary evidence has been produced and not the primary evidence and the reasons must be credible.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

gsk

5. This application is allowed subject to admissibility, proof and relevancy.

26.06.2024 gsk A.No.2743 of 2024 in Tr.C.S.No.148 of 2021 and C.S.No.329 of 2019 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis