RADHE SHYAM DHAKAD Vs. JAIVARDHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 5 has filed I.A. No. 4398/2015, for rejecting the affidavit being contrary to Order 19 Rule 1 & 3 of CPC.

(2.) Respondent No. 5 has submitted that every deponent affidavit has to state the nature or source of his knowledge as required by Order 19 Rule 1 & 3 of CPC. He also relied on M/s Sukhwinder Pal Vs. State of Punjab, 1982 AIR(SC) 65, in which it is held that it was incumbent for the deponent to disclose the nature and source of the knowledge with sufficient particularity. The respondent No. 5 has also relied on V.K. Saklecha Vs. Jagjeewan, 1974 AIR(SC) 1957, in which it has been held that Section 83 of the Act requires an affidavit in the prescribed form in support of the allegations of corrupt practice. Form No. 25 requires the deponent to state which statements are true to knowledge and which statements are true to information. In the present case affidavit of the petitioner does not fulfill the mandatory requirement and needs to be rejected.

(3.) Respondent No. 5 further claimed that in the case of A.K.K. Nambiar Vs. Union of India, 1970 AIR(SC) 652, it is held that "in essence verification is required to enable the Court to find out as to whether it will be safe to act on such affidavit evidence. In absence of proper verification affidavits cannot be admitted in evidence". The respondent No. 5 claimed that in the absence of specific verification, the affidavit has no value and has to be rejected.