The plaintiff is not required to give full particulars in the plaint if the petitioner is aware of the transaction and the plaintiff has already provided the necessary particulars in response to the application under Order 6, Rule 5.

P. C. JAIN, J.

( 1 ) THE defendant has filed this revision petition under Section 115, C. P. C. against the order dated 21-11-1997 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur in Civil Original Case No. 8/97 whereby the application filed by the defendant-petitioner under Order 6, Rule 5, C. P. C. was dismissed.

( 2 ) MATERIAL facts necessary for the disposal of this petition may be stated as follows. The non-petitioner No. 1 filed a suit for recovery of Rupees 4,47,263. 93 against the petitioner and non-petitioner No. 2, which is pending before the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur. In that suit, the plaintiff made averments that the petitioner had pleaded shares, the list of which has been submitted before the Court giving all the necessary particulars. The petitioner filed an application under Order 11, Rule 14, C. P. C. for production of the said shares. In reply to this application, the plaintiff-Bank said that the pledged shares as mentioned in the plaint, were not with the Bank. It was explained that the shares pledged by the petitioner were returned to the petitioner by the Bank and the petitioner re-pledged the same by pledging new shares. The petitioner, therefore, filed an application under Order 6, Rule 5, C. P. C. for getting clarification from the plaintiff-Bank asking the plaintiff when the petitioner made a request to the plaintiff-Bank for return of the pledged shares, when his request was accepted, when the shares were returned by the Bank to the petitioner and when the new shares were pledged with the Bank in place of the original shares. According to the petitioners, all these particulars are necessary for the plaintiff to narrate in the pleading. In reply to the above application, the non-petitioner No. 1 did not give any particulars sought by the petitioner. The Court dismissed the above application by stating that the plaintiff- Bank is ready and willing to submit the new shares pledged with the Bank. The question is whether the Bank is required to give full particulars in the plaint as asked by the petitioner and required by law to be stated in the pleading ?

( 3 ) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and non-petitioner No. 1.

( 4 ) SHRI S. S. Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner, has referred to the pleading (plaint) of non-petitioner No. 1 and submitted that it is very interesting and important to note that in the plaint the plaintiff did not care to allege that the petitioner, after pledging the shares as described in the plaint, came and requested the Bank to release the above certificates and that the non-petitioner was ready to re-pledge another new certificates and that the Bank agreed and accordingly the original certificates pledged by the petitioner were returned to him and he pledged the new certificates. The plaintiff disclosed these new and important facts for the first time when the petitioner moved application under Order 6, Rule 5 CPC. Since the plaintiff has not stated about these new certificates in the pleading, it is necessary that he must furnish better particulars in response to the application filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel has also submitted that the petitioner was making correspondence with the company which issued the original shares requesting for issuing the duplicate.

( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has opposed the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6, Rule 5 and submitted that when a notice was issued by the petitioner under Order 11, Rule 16, CPC, the plaintiff in his reply stated all these facts and gave the material particulars of the certificates which were re-pledged at the request of the petitioner by the Bank. Learned counsel has also referred to the reply submitted by the plaintiff to the above application in which it was clearly stated that the plaintiff furnished the list of the shares which were pledged on 8-6-94. It also contains the signatures of defendant No. 1. He als