NIMA TSERING KHRIME Vs. R.K. KHRIMEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE operative portion of the order dated 18.9.1985 runs:

(2.) THE Respondent has filed an application under Order 19, Rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure, to order the attendance of the deponents who have sworn affidavits in support of the Petitioner. The Petitioner has filed counter opposing the petition. The said order dated 18.9.1985 was passed in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court, in Khandesh Spinning v. Rashtriya Girni Kamgar Sangh : AIR 1960 SC 571.

(3.) BUT the decision of the Supreme Court in Khandesh Spinning (supra) has been distinguished by a larger Bench, in State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Bakshi Gulam Mohammad : AIR 1967 SC 122. In that case, the Supreme Court was construing Section 4(D) of the Jammu and Kashmir Commission and Enquiries Act, 1962. Under Section 4(g) the Commission shall have the power of a Civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure in respect of receiving evidence on affidavits etc. The High Court has held that the power of the Commission to order a fact to be proved by affidavit ares object to the proviso to Order 19, Rule I of the Code and that the power cannot be exercised when a party desires the production of the persons swearing the affidavits for cross -examining them. The Supreme Court has reversed the decision of the High Court and has held that the Rules of Natural Justice require that a party against whom an allegation ii being inquired into should be given a bearing. The right of bearing does not include the right of cross -examination in the context of that case. The right of cross -examination must depend upon the circumstances of each case and also on the statute under which the allegations are being enquired into [See para 29].