TRANS IMAGE CORPORATION vs M/S G3 INFO SYSTEMS PVT LTD & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~93 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 1st, September, 2025 + CM(M) 1685/2025& CM APPL. 54820-54821/2025 TRANS IMAGE CORPORATION .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinav Sharma with Ms. Avsi Malik and Mr. Shubham, Advocates. Versus M/S G3 INFO SYSTEMS PVT LTD & ANR. .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner has filed a suit for recovery which is directed against two different companies. 2. When the plaintiff’s witness entered into witness-box and was under cross-examination, the defendants confronted them with one E-mail and the relevant question and the answer given by the witness and the further direction given by the Court read as under:- “At this stage, the witness is shown email dated 24.07.2012 sent by [email protected] to the defendant companies. Attention of the witness is drawn to point D of the said email. The e-mail is now Mark X1 Q. Is it correct to say that the above mentioned portion of the email reflects that counter-guarantees were being given by the defendant companies to the Plaintiff firm? Ans. I cannot recall if this email has been sent by the Plaintiff to the defendant. I will have to check my record. It is correct that this email ID [email protected] is mine. I have not filed the entire communication with the defendant companies. I have only filed Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1685/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:03.09.2025 17:16:48 what was relevant. Remaining cross-examination is deferred with direction to the witness to produce the entire email correspondence with the defendant companies.” 3. The grievance in the present petition is with respect to the abovesaid direction whereby the learned Trial Court has directed plaintiffs to produce t