Madras High Court
M/S.Abt Maruti vs M/S.Swaraj Security Force on 15 December, 2021
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019 & CMP.No.8719/2019
[Physical Hearing]
1.M/s.ABT Maruti,
rep.by its Senior General Manager
No.72, Mount Road, Guindy
Chennai 600 032.
2.M/s.ABT Ltd
rep.by its Managing Director,
NO.72, Mount Road, Guindy
Chennai 600 032. .. Petitioners /
Defendants in
both petitions
Vs.
1.M/s.Swaraj Security Force
rep.by its Managing Partner
V.Mohanraj
2.V.Mohanraj
3.M.Lakshmi .. Respondents
/ Plaintiffs in
both petitions
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
Common Prayer:- Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated dated
08.03.2019 passed in IA.Nos.01/2019 and 02/2019 in OS.No.3021/2017
on the file of the learned XVII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Petitioners in both
CRPs : Mr.S.Sriram
For RR 1 to 3 in
both CRPs : Mr.M.Imthias
COMMON ORDER
(1) These Civil Revision Petitions are directed against the order dated,
08.03.2019 in I.A.No.01/2019 and I.A.No.02/2019 in
O.S.No.3021/2017 on the file of the learned XVII Assistant Judge,
City Civil Court, Chennai, in allowing the petition to reopen the
case and to recall the P.W.1 as witness, for further examination to
mark a document.
(2) Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of these Civil
Revision Petitions are as follows:
(3) In these Civil Revision Petitions, the respondents as plaintiffs filed
the Suit in O.S.No.3021/2017 before the learned XVII Assistant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai for recovery of a sum of
Rs.6,26,198/- with the interest 18% and for consequential relief.
(4) The Suit was filed on the basis of money due for the services
rendered by the respondents/plaintiffs, who are engaged to provide
security services to the petitioners. During the pendency of the
Suit, the respondents filed an application in I.A.No.01/2019 and
I.A.No.02/2019 in the Suit to reopen plaintiff side evidence and to
recall P.W.1 in/for the purpose of marking a document namely, the
Partnership Deed in the Suit. The said applications were allowed
by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants have
preferred the above Civil Revision Petitions.
(5) Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted
that the applications filed by the plaintiffs to reopen the case and to
recall the P.W.1 for letting in further evidence is not permissible in
law and in the given case, the Court below failed to give sufficient
opportunity to the revision petitioners for making their
submissions. Learned counsel submitted that applications cannot
be allowed to reopen and recall witnesses to fill up lacunae and that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
the Suit cannot be reopened especially when the defendants side
evidence was closed.
(6) Learned counsel then relied upon the evidence of P.W.1. During
cross examination. It is pointed out by the learned counsel that in
January, 2018, when the plaintiffs witness was cross examined, the
defendants have suggested to the witness about the document to
show the existence of the Partnership Firm and about the
authorised representative of the firm to institute the Suit against the
defendants. It is contended by the learned counsel that the issue
relates to the production of the necessary document was raised long
before the witness was examined. Hence, it is submitted that the
document if any ought to have been filed long back.
(7) It is further submitted that the applications filed by the
respondents/plaintiffs are not only belated but also lacking bona
fides. The learned counsel submitted that the Suit was reserved for
judgment and that the plaintiffs at that stage filed the applications
just to fill up the lacunae and to withdraw the admissions made the
P.W.1, in favour of the defendants during the cross examination.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
This Court carefully gone through the evidence which was relied
upon by the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners.
There is nothing to indicate that the plaintiffs wanted to withdraw
any admissions made by P.W.1 in the course of either cross
examination or chief examination.
(8) Several questions were put to the witness P.W.1 about the
document to show the existence of plaintiffs as a Partnership firm.
It is also to be noted that the questions relating to the competence
of the witness and the authentication given to the representative of
the plaintiffs to file the Suit are casual. One of the suggestions that
was put to the plaintiffs witness was whether P.W.1 has produced
any evidence to show who are all the partners in the plaintiffs firm.
In view of the nature of questions put to P.W.1., and pleadings this
Court is able to see that the plaintiffs were adviced to reopen and
recall witness only to avoid the technical objection which may be
considered by the Court, while, considering the claim of the
plaintiff on merits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
(9) In that view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
perfectly in agreement with the Lower Court to allow the petitions.
It is specifically stated that reason for not filing the said document
has been satisfactorily explained by the petitioner. This Court does
not find any merits in the Civil Revision Petitions.
(10) Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners relied upon
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bagai
Construction Vs. Gupta Building Material Store reported in
(2013)14 SCC 1 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had an
occasion to consider the scope of Order 18 Rule 17 CPC. It is held
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the provisions under Order 18
Rule 17 is not meant to fill up omissions or lacunae. It is also stated
that witness cannot be recalled merely because no prejudice will be
caused to the other side.
(11) The Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated that the provisions under
Order 18 Rule 17 CPC cannot be used in a routine manner which
would defeat the very object of amendments made in the Civil
Procedure Code. The provisions under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
enables the Court to reopen the case and recall the witness at any
stage, however when such applications were filed belatedly, the
Court is expected to see the bona fides of the applications. When
acceptable reasons are assigned for allowing the applications at the
belated stage the Court will not hesitate to give an opportunity to
the plaintiffs to put forth their case after recording reasons for
entertaining the applications.
(12) When the Court is expected to be cautious, it will not prohibit the
plaintiffs or defendants to invoke provisions under Order 18 Rule
17 CPC for just reasonable causes. The cited judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court does not help to advance the case of the plaintiffs.
Going by the factual averments made in the Plaint and the Written
Statement and the portions of evidence relied upon by the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners this Court is inclined to hold
in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs. Keeping in mind, the
purpose and object of Order 18 Rule 17 CPC the Lower Court has
exercised its discretion, and the revision petition is filed without
any bona fides. As a matter of fact, no prejudice is caused to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
petitioners. The petitioners as a defendants have filed the above
Civil Revision Petitions to protract the proceedings without any
bona fides.
(13) Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
15.12.2021
cda
Internet : Yes
To
The XVII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/9
CRP.PD.Nos.1329 & 1331/2019
S.S.SUNDAR, J.,
cda
CRP.PD.No.1329 & 1331/2019
15.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/9
