Delhi High Court
Mis. Stellar Information ... vs Mr. Chandan Kumar Chaudhary, on 21 July, 2022
$~58(Appellate)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 701/2022 & CM No. 31966/2022, CM No.31967/2022
MIS. STELLAR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE
LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gagan Mathur and Mr. M.
D. Jangra, Advs.
versus
MR. CHANDAN KUMAR CHAUDHARY, ..... Respondent
Through: None
CORAM:
HON' BLE MR. J USTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
J U D G M E N T(O R A L)
% 21.07.2022
1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assails an
order dated 13th May, 2022, passed by the learned Additional District
Judge (the learned ADJ) in CS DJ 438/17 (Stellar Information
Technology Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandan Kumar Chaudhary).
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged three grounds of
challenge to the impugned order. The first was to the rejection, by the
learned ADJ, of the petitioner's request that the affidavit filed by DW-
1 be not exhibited, as it was argumentative in nature. The second is
against the disallowance, by the learned ADJ, of certain questions
which the petitioner desired to put to DW-1. The third is against the
warning administered in the impugned order dated 13th May, 2022, to
learned Counsel for the petitioner, for having made an incorrect
statement regarding collection of certified copies.
Digitally Signed
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:22.07.2022
14:36:14
3. Insofar as the third ground of challenge is concerned, learned
Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the application for
certified copies were presented in time. As such, this Court expunges
the warning, contained in the impugned order dated 13th May, 2022, to
learned Counsel for the petitioner (the plaintiff in the suit).
4. Apropos the other two grounds of challenge, I queried, of
learned Counsel for the petitioner, as to the provision under which a
party in a proceeding could resist exhibition of an affidavit on the
ground that it was argumentative in nature. He has invited my
attention to Order XIX Rule 3 of the CPC which reads thus:
"3 "Matters to which affidavits shall be confined"
(1) Affidavits shall be confined to such facts as the
deponent is able of his own knowledge to prove, except on
interlocutory applications, on which statements of his belief
may be admitted; provided that the grounds thereof are stated.
(2) The costs of every affidavit which shall unnecessarily
set forth matters of hearsay or argumentative matter, or copies
of or extracts from documents, shall (unless the Court
otherwise directs) be paid by the party filing the same."
5. To my mind, while Order XIX Rule 3 of the CPC does set out
the contents of affidavits to be filed in civil proceedings, it does not
permit striking off an affidavit from the record merely because it is not
in terms of Order XIX Rule 3. Nonetheless, if the affidavit is not in
compliance with Order XIX Rule 3, and, for that reason, the assertions
and averments in the affidavit stand compromised in any manner, the
defence of the petitioner, on that score, would remain open to be urged
Digitally Signed
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:22.07.2022
14:36:14
at the appropriate stage before the learned ADJ.
6. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the contents of the
affidavit and it is reiterated that are objections of the petitioner in that
regard would remain open and, if urged, would be considered on its
own merits by the learned ADJ.
7. Apropos the second ground of challenge, relating to the
disallowance, by the learned ADJ, of certain questions that the
petitioner sought to put to DW-1, I expressed my opinion, to learned
Counsel for the petitioner, that the issue of whether a particular
question should be allowed or disallowed, is essentially one of
discretion of the court recording the evidence, and Article 227 of the
Constitution does not empower this Court to monitor recording of
evidence by the court below. Learned Counsel for the petitioner
prays, in response, that his objections to the disallowance, by the
learned ADJ, of questions which, according to him, could validly be
put to the witness, should remain open to be urged by him at the
appropriate stage.
8. Reserving liberty as prayed, this petition stands disposed of in
the aforesaid terms.
9. Copy of this order be given dasti to learned Counsel for the
petitioner under signatures of the Court Master.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
J ULY 21, 2022/kr
Digitally Signed
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:22.07.2022
14:36:14
