Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jyoti Bhatia vs Mamta Arora And Another on 5 December, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
207 CR-5390-2019 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 05.12.2024
JYOTI BHATIA .... Petitioner
VERSUS
MAMTA ARORA AND ANOTHER .... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Viren Jain, Advocate and
Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondents despite service.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)
1. The present revision petition has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 24.01.2018 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) whereby leave to seek interrogatories under Order 11 Rule 1 CPC was granted to the defendant-respondent No.1.
2. Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff- petitioner herein filed a suit seeking a declaration to the effect that the plaintiff-petitioner is the sole surviving legal heir of deceased Subhash Chander son of Gobind Ram and successor to his estate being the only heir/daughter of Late Subhash Chander and that the defendant-respondents are neither the legal heirs of deceased - Subhash Chander - nor they have any concern with his estate as also for permanent injunction. Even prior to filing of the written statement, defendant-respondent No.1 filed an application under AMAN JAIN 2024.12.09 09:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 207 CR-5390-2019 (O&M) -2- Order 11 Rule 1 CPC for submission of interrogatories with the leave of the Court. A reply was filed to the said application. The application was allowed vide the impugned order dated 24.01.2018. Aggrieved by the same the present revision petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner would contend that even prior to the filing of the written statement, interrogatories cannot be served upon the opposite party. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Raj Narain V/s Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi & Ors. [AIR 1972 SC 1302] to contend that interrogatories under Order 11 Rule 1 CPC must relate to any matter in question and must have a close connection with the matter in question. In the present case without there being any written statement on the record the matter in question cannot even be determined. That being so, this was not the stage for serving of interrogatories.
4. The defendant-respondents have chosen not to appear despite service.
5. Heard.
6. In the present case even prior to filing of the written statement the application under Order 11 Rule 1 CPC for serving interrogatories was filed which was allowed vide the impugned order. Order 11 Rule 1 CPC reads as under :
'ORDER XI
1. Discovery by interrogatories - In any suit the plaintiff or defendant by leave of the Court may deliver AMAN JAIN 2024.12.09 09:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 207 CR-5390-2019 (O&M) -3-
interrogatories in writing for the examination of the opposite parties or any one or more of such parties and such interrogatories when delivered shall have a note at the foot thereof stating which of such interrogatories each of such persons is required to answer:
Provided that no party shall deliver more than one set of interrogatories to the same party without an order for that purpose:
Provided also that interrogatories which do not relate to any matters in question in the suit shall be deemed irrelevant, notwithstanding that they might be admissible on the oral cross-examination of a witness'.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Raj Narain (Supra) has held as under :
'Questions that may be relevant during cross- examination are not necessarily relevant as interrogatories. The only questions that are relevant as interrogatories are those relating to "any matters in question". The interrogatories served must have, reasonably close connection with "matters in question". Viewed thus, interrogatories 1 to 18 as well as 31 must be held to irrelevant'.
8. In the present case, in the absence of any written statement, the matter in question cannot even be determined. The provision itself is very AMAN JAIN 2024.12.09 09:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 207 CR-5390-2019 (O&M) -4- clear that interrogatories which do not relate to any matter in question shall be deemed to be irrelevant. Without the stand of the defendant having come on the record, the question as to what is relevant and what is irrelevant cannot be determined.
9. In view of the above, the present revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 24.01.2018 is set aside. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
05.12.2024 (ALKA SARIN)
Aman Jain JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: Yes/No
AMAN JAIN
2024.12.09 09:33
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this
order/judgment