MAJOR SINGH Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,40,000/- as principal amount and Rs. 75,600/- as interest thereon, besides future interest on the basis of pronote and receipt dated 4.6.2004 was filed by Suresh Kumar- respondent against Major Singh-petitioner. After his service in the suit, the petitioner filed his written statement wherein he denied the execution of any pronote/receipt by him in favour of Suresh Kumar as, according to him, he never borrowed any amount from him. Further, the alleged pronote and receipt were totally false, fabricated and fictitious documents. The respondent then filed his replication wherein he reiterated about the execution of pronote and receipt by the petitioner of having borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- from him.

(2.) SIMULTANEOUSLY with the written statement, the petitioner had also filed application dated 22.9.2007 praying for grant of relief to deliver the interrogatories upon the respondent for his examination under Order XI Rule 1 C.P.C. The respondent opposed the said application on the ground that it had been filed for the sole purpose of delaying his well merited claim, based on pronote and receipt, besides diverting the attention of the trial Court to unnecessary matters which were not related to the situation in question. In the prayer clause of his reply, the respondent prayed for dismissal of the application of the petitioner, besides praying that, if for any reason, the trial Court was of the view that he should give reply to the interrogatories, the petitioner should first be asked as to whether he admitted the execution of the pronote and receipt and be also required to furnish bank guarantee for the suit amount. The application filed by the petitioner under Order XI Rule 1 C.P.C. has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 28.2.2008, which has been challenged by him by filing the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner by submitting that the interrogatories in question were not relevant to the subject matter of his suit and being pressed upon by the petitioner with the sole purpose of diverting the attention of the trial Court to unnecessary matters.