Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

To chalenge the order of the lower court which has passed the order under o.11,r.1 of the c.p.c.

(Querist) 28 October 2014 This query is : Resolved 
sir. i am defending a civil suit in which plaintiff had filled an application under o.11,r.1 of c.p.c. to put interrogateries. while giving such application permission to put question to defendant has to be observed. but in the said case the plaitiff has prayed thus, this honorable court may b pleased to grant this application ........ an court has order as. granted no detail order has been made whuch is required as per o.11.r.1 moreover i is not in the firm which is required. In the said circumstances if the application is allowed then i want to challenge the said order. so mainly which ground generally should be taken or under which specific provision appeal may lie to dustrict court. under order 43?
Devajyoti Barman (Expert) 29 October 2014
Refer to CPC . iNTERROGATORIES ARE NO MORE THERE IN CPC.
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 29 October 2014
Consult your senior and show him the case file.
V R SHROFF (Expert) 29 October 2014
IF ORDERED, YOU ARE BOUND TO ANSWER INTERROGATORIES WITHIN 10 DAYS ON OATH..
UNDER O11 RULE 8 OF CPC

any order SC // to avoid interrogatories, pl inform [ after 1-7-2002]
Adv M.D.Azhar (Querist) 29 October 2014
Barman Sir, Please reply me in detail, as per ur reply, provisions regarding the interrogatories has been removed?
P. Venu (Expert) 29 October 2014
Are there any problem, other than technical objections, in answering the interrogatories?
Adv M.D.Azhar (Querist) 31 October 2014
yes there is an objection on the technical ground and also on the ground of fact but court has held that, just because the previous application seeking the permission of the court to deliver the interrogatories has been granted, defendant are bound to give the reply of the said interrogatories. further more i want to add is that as per the provisions only one question can be put to the one defendant but here in this case more then one i mean lot's of question has been asked which can be asked during the cross examination. so the query is that, after passing the said order court has not ordered that within the prescribed time reply should be made. Now what i want to ask is that, weather we are bound to give the reply of all the questions which are completely unnecessary? or we can challenge this order before the session court? if yes then under which provisions? because i have read order 43 of the C.P.C. but i have not seen the provisions in according to which i challenge this order. Most of the seniors in our town also has not much knowledge about the said query. so please guide me sir.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 02 November 2014
Firstly under Order 11 Rule 1, it is one set of questions and not only one question as misinterpreted by you. Also, you may please re-visit the provisions once again wherein it clearly states that : 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.
The details on further queries can be understood from the provisions of rule 2 of the same order.
Moreover the time to answer all interrogatories by an affidavit shall have t be filed within 10 days as per rule 8 of the same order.
Hope this clears your query.


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :