Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
(BANDRA BRANCH)
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT NO. 10
IN
L. E. SUIT NO. 22 OF 2022
CNR NO. MHSCA30013082021
1. The trustees of Bai Hirabai Tata
Memorial Trust Fund & Ors. …Plaintiffs
Versus
Mr. Rohintan Sorab Elavia …Defendant
********
Mr. Kersasp F. Bhot, Advocate for Plaintiffs.
The Fort Circle Advocate Solution, Advocate for Defendant.
********
Coram : R. R. Khan
Judge
C. R. No.33
Date : 08th February 2023
ORDER
. Under Order XI, Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 the
defendant has delivered three interrogatories seeking its answer.
2. The plaintiff has filed reply at Exh.11 and contended that no
written statement is yet filed by defendant. It is contended that
proposed interrogatories are better of evidence and answer is already
/home/steno33/Desktop/Exh 10 in LE 222022.odt
-- 1 of 4 --
2
in the knowledge of defendant. It is contended that with malafide
intention present interrogatories came to be filed which deserves
dismissal.
3. I have heard learned Advocate for the defendant at length. I
have perused written notes of arguments filed by plaintiff at Exh.12. I
have perused interrogatories, reply of plaintiff, plaint and other
material on record.
4. During course of hearing, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff
has placed his reliance on the case of Dinajpur Trading and
Banking Co. Ltd. V/s. Probhash Chandra Sen and others, AIR
1933 Calcutta 151, in which Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held
that, a party is not entitled to administer interrogatories for obtaining
discovery of facts which constitutes exclusively the evidence of his
adversaries case.
5. The next, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff has placed his
reliance on the case of Birendra Kumar Gupta V/s. Sm. Chinta
Devi, AIR 1974 Patna 287, in which Hon'ble Patna High Court has
held that, the documents which are not basis of suit and have to be
produced at a later stage simply as evidence, the defendant is not
entitled for inspection of documents.
6. The next, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff has placed his
reliance on the case of Baidyanath and others V/s. Bholanath Boy
and others, AIR 1923 Patna 337, in which Hon'ble Patna High
Court has held that, as order of production of documents must follow
as order as to affidavit of documents under Order XI, Rule 12 of
C.P.C. when that order would be passed against a party it would be
/home/steno33/Desktop/Exh 10 in LE 222022.odt
-- 2 of 4 --
3
open to him to say that so long as the opposite party had not
established his title to the property, it was not open to the court to
compel him to disclose his documents.
7. Finally, the learned Advocate for the plaintiff has placed his
reliance on the case of Raj Naraian V/s. Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi
and another, AIR 1972 Supreme Court 1302, in which Hon'ble
Apex Court have held that, question that may be relevant during
crossexamination are not necessary relevant as interrogatories. The
only questions that are relevant as an interrogatories are those
relating to any matters in question. The interrogatories served must
have reasonably close connection with matters in question.
8. Keeping in view, the above relied judicial ratios and principles
therein, let I revert to the delivered interrogatories which appears
fully relevant during the course of crossexamination and at this
juncture, they are not having reasonably close connection with
matter in question. According to plaintiff, the said facts are already
in knowledge of defendant who has failed to file the written
statement. Thus, on the basis of relied judicial ratios and facts and
circumstances placed before me, it appears to me just and proper that
answer given by plaintiff is sufficient and there is no need to get any
further order. Hence, I am satisfied to pass following order.
ORDER
1 The delivered interrogatories being relevant
with the crossexamination and at present,
sufficiently answered by the plaintiff, there
is no need to make any further order.
/home/steno33/Desktop/Exh 10 in LE 222022.odt
-- 3 of 4 --
4
2 The Application at Exh.10 is filed.
( Dictated and pronounced in open Court. )
( R. R. Khan )
Date : 08.02.2023 Judge, C. R. No.33
Order dictated on : 08.02.2023
Order checked & signed on : 08.02.2023
/home/steno33/Desktop/Exh 10 in LE 222022.odt
-- 4 of 4 --