JUDGMENT

Arun Monga, J. (Oral)

CM-812-CII-2023

This is an application filed under Order 22 Rules 2, 3 and 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for bringing on record legal representatives of deceased plaintiff/petitioner No.7, namely, Smt. Ram Devi, who died on 10.10.2020. The legal representatives of deceased-petitioner No.7 are mentioned in para No.2 of the application.

For the reasons stated therein, application is allowed, as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions. Amended Memo of Parties is taken on record.

Main case

Petition herein is for quashing an order dated 05.12.2022 (Annexure P-7) whereby the application under Order 11 Rules 11, 12 & 14 filed by the plaintiff/petitioners herein for interrogatories, has been dismissed.

2. Given the nature of order being passed, there is no necessity to issue notice to the defendant/respondents, as no prejudice would be caused to them. Notice to the respondents is dispensed with.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the plaintiff/petitioners and gone through the case file.

4. The prayer in the petitioners' application Annexure P-6 is that the interrogatories therein be allowed and the defendants be directed to declare/give the information/admission documents etc.

5. As per provisions of Order XI Rules 1,2,4 of CPC, an applicant, may with the leave of the Court, deliver interrogatories in writing for the examination of the opposite parties or any of them. The particular interrogatories are to be submitted to the Court in form No. 2 in Appendix C, with such variations, as circumstances may require. The prescription of specific form for delivery of interrogatories is not without reason. The object is to make the questions clear to the Court for adjudicating whether or not leave to deliver the same should be granted.

6. As regards discovery/production of documents, Rules 12 and 14 of Order XI ibid provide that an applicant shall apply to the Court for an order directing the other party to make discovery of the documents relating to the matter and to produce them. When there is a combined application for leave of the court to deliver interrogatories and also for direction for discovery/production of documents, as has been done in the instant case, the intermixing of interrogatories with the documents sought to be discovered/ got produced, is also likely to cause confusion and come in the way of the Court in deciding whether or not to direct the other party to make discovery of the documents relating to the matter and to produce them.

7. Perusal of the application Annexure P-6 shows that the same has been drafted quite loosely. Interrogatories to which the answers are to be elicited from the defendants have not been framed as per prescribed form No. 2 in Appendix C. Further, there is also intermixing of interrogatories with the documents sought to be discovered/ got produced.

8. However, the petitioners ought not to suffer simply because of loose drafting of their application. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside and the petitioners are allowed one more opportunity, if so advised, to file fresh application for leave of the Court to deliver interrogatories in form No. 2 in Appendix C with such variations as circumstances may require, by separating them from the discovery/production of documents and/or a distinct application for discovery/production of documents. If any such application/s is/are filed, the same shall be decided the learned trial Court in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the impugned order. Ordered accordi