Shrivallabh VS Ibrahimkhan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

A.S.CHANDURKAR
Shrivallabh – Appellant
Versus
Ibrahimkhan – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr.V.K.Paliwal, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1 & 2:Mr.S.Moharir, Advocate

JUDGMENT

A.S.Chandurkar, J.—Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 25.7.2013 passed below Exhibit-57 in Regular Civil Suit No.559/2012. By aforesaid order, the application moved by the petitioner original plaintiff calling upon the respondents defendants to answer interrogatories under provisions of Order 11 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘the Code’) has been rejected.

3. The facts giving rise to the present proceedings are as follows:

The petitioner is the original plaintiff who has filed Special Civil Suit No.60/2006 seeking declaration that the judgment and decree dated 5.11.2003 passed in Special Civil Suit No.325/1994 was null and void, the same having been obtained by practicing fraud. According to the petitioner, the suit property was agreed to be sold by the respondent No.1 to the petitioner. According to the petitioners, a document was shown to have been executed on 3.2.1992 by the respondent No.1 by obtaining the acknowledgment of the petitioner as having receiving a sum of Rs.63,000 in view of consideration for aforesaid plot. On the basis of another document