Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3.The learned senior counsel further submitted that the evidence of P.W.1 before the Trial Court is that on 27.03.2010 at about 7.30 p.m., the petitioners along 50 unidentified persons, entered the office of the Sangam, committed the offence, the complainant preferred a complaint to the Assistant Commissioner of Police alleging petitioners, stolen the documents followed by another complaint to the Rathinapuri Police and complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore on 01.04.2010. These complaints marked as E.P9, Ex.P10 and Ex.P13. The complainant admitted that a civil suit in O.S.No.186 of 2010 filed by the petitioner which is marked as Ex.P5 with other documents marked as Ex.P6 to Ex.P8. Further, the complainant https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis admits that he received the RDO notice dated 30.03.2010 which is marked as Ex.P12. Further, the complainant himself admits that he filed a suit in O.S.228 of 2010 against the petitioners. Both the civil suits, O.S.No.186 of 2010 which got re-numbered as O.S.No.615 of 2010 and O.S.No.228 of 2010 tried together and judgment was delivered and the judgments of the Civil Court marked as Ex.P19 to Ex.P21. Further, the list of missing documents from the Union Office marked as Ex.P14, an Official Receiver was appointed as per Ex.P17. Further, the evidence of P.W.1 is that P.W.2/Thiyagarajan informed about the occurrence. P.W.2 deposed that he was informed about the occurrence at about 6.00 p.m. On 27.03.2010 and he came to the Union Office and when he entered to enter the Union Office, the petitioners and 50 others prevented him from entering the Union Office and threatened him at 7.30 p.m., P.W.1 and others came there, they were also prevented from entering the office. Further, P.W.2 states that the documents of the Union were taken in a car and thereafter P.W.1 lodged the complaint. The evidence of P.W.3 is that on 27.03.2010 at about 3.00 p.m., he came to the Union Office and at 5.30 p.m., P.W.2 called him and informed about the incident which clearly proves contradiction of statements of the witnesses. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Ex.P8 is the complaint lodged by the 4th petitioner against P.W.1 and P.W.2 on 25.03.2020 and C.S.R. also assigned. Further on 27.03.2010, a suit in O.S.No.186 of 2010 was filed by the petitioners against P.W.1 to P.W.3 and obtained an order of injunction against them.