SUBHASH BHIKAJI SABNIS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Perused the records.

(2.) This appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 4th March, 2005 passed by the learned Single judge in Writ Petition No. 9523 of 2004. The appeal is essentially against the part of the impugned judgment which relates to certain observations in relation to the drafting and presentation of the affidavit under order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the directions issued in that regard to the courts and the tribunals.

(3.) The said petition was filed against the order of the trial Court disallowing cross-examination of the deponents, who had filed their affidavits under order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. When the matter came up before the learned Single judge, the advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents conceded that the deponents, who had filed the affidavits, were required to be subjected to cross-examination. In that regard though the petition could have disposed of by consent, the learned Single judge, being of the opinion that the procedure for preparing the affidavits was not being followed in the manner it was required to be followed, proceeded to deal with the said issue and held that the procedure followed in that regard defeats the very purpose for which the provision under Rule 4 has been incorporated in the Order XVIII, under amendment to the Code of civil Procedure in the year 1999 and 2002. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has issued certain directions whereby every affidavit under Order XVIII rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure is required to be prepared by the lawyer for the party, and thereafter, to be transcribed by mechanical process, either with the help of typewriter or with the computer, for the purpose of filing thereof in the court, and at the same time the concerned advocate is required to retain copy of the draft affidavit prepared by the advocate on the basis of the information given to him by the concerned deponent till the deponent is discharged in the concerned case by the Court. Aggrieved by these observations and the directions, the appellants have filed the present appeal.