NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SUJANMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned order the defendant's application for discovery was rejected by the Trial Court. The trial Court has observed that the documents in respect of which discovery was sought were not specified. The application has been rejected on the ground of vagueness and for not specifying the documents.

(2.) IN Shri M.L. Sethi v. Shri R.P. Kapur (AIR 1972 SC 2379) the Supreme Court in para 5 of its Judgment has observed that it was wrong to hold that an application for discovery should specify the documents sought to be discovered.

(3.) THIS being the scheme of the provisions for discovery of documents, the trial Court has certainly committed material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction to allow or reject an application for discovery.