The plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit on January 25, 2017, seeking a decree of Rs. 22,47,00,000/- against the defendants for their failure to remit payments for airline tickets and other services purchased on credit. In response, the defendants denied liability and challenged the reliability of the BSP Agent Billing Statement. To bolster their case, the plaintiffs sought permission to introduce additional documents as evidence.

The documents in question include legal authorizations (such as a Power of Attorney), governmental statutes, operational evidence (including screenshots), communications between legal representatives, and printouts of webpage screenshots.

The plaintiffs argued that these documents are essential to substantiate their claims, counter the defendants' arguments, and provide crucial context and evidence necessary for a full understanding of the case. The Court permitted the plaintiffs to file these additional documents, including the Power of Attorney, a Canadian statute, webpage screenshots, and certain resolutions from the Travel Agent's Handbook.

The Court noted that when filing documents at a later stage, the plaintiff must demonstrate a reasonable cause for not disclosing these documents along with the initial Plaint. However, the requirement to establish a reasonable cause for nondisclosure does not apply if the plaintiff claims that the documents were discovered subsequently and were not within the plaintiff's power, possession, control, or custody at the time the Plaint was filed.

Furthermore, the Court clarified that at the stage of granting leave to submit additional documents, it is not necessary to assess the genuineness of these documents; the authenticity of the documents is to be determined during the trial.

The Court underscored the importance of procedural fairness and the necessity for the plaintiffs to establish a reasonable cause for the late filing of documents.

Case Citation: IFKO Tokio General Vs Inder Travels: 01.08.2024 : CS(COMM) 166/2017: 2024: DHC:5632: Delhi High Court:Navin Chawla. H.J.

Disclaimer:
The information shared here is intended to serve the public interest by offering insights and perspectives. However, readers are advised to exercise their own discretion when interpreting and applying this information. The content herein is subjective and may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor - Patent and Trademark Attorney
Email: [email protected], Ph no: 9990389539