INDRANI BHATTACHARJEE Vs. CMO PRAKKA SUPER THERMAL POWER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, before the Commissioner, a contention was raised by the complainant that photographs should not be taken on record. That objection was sustained and, therefore, this application is filed for production of photographs on record. It is to be reiterated that we are not governed by the technicalities of procedural law including CPC or Evidence Act. Hence, opposite party is permitted to produce photographs on record within a week. It would be open to the complainant to file any additional reply, if required, pertaining to photographs. List on 7-4-2005 for final hearing. Parties will file written synopsis on arguments.

(2.) HENCEFORTH in all matters wherever there is a prayer for cross-examination of the witnesses by the learned advocates for the parties, learned advocates to produce the interrogatories on record and those interrogatories should be replied by the concerned parties on affidavit. Thereafter, the Commission would decide whether any further cross-examination on any point is necessary or not. The State Commissions as well as District Forums instead of recording the cross-examination may follow the practice of asking the parties to give interrogatories and thereafter reply of interrogatories on affidavits should be taken on record first instead of permitting the lengthy cross-examination. Registry is directed to circulate this order to all the State Commissions with the request to circulate the same to all the District Forums.