Skip to content


Maheshwari Oil Mill Vs. Girjanath Durga Saran - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Revn. No. 1416 of 1979
Judge
Reported inAIR1980All265
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 115 - Order 11, Rule 1
AppellantMaheshwari Oil Mill
RespondentGirjanath Durga Saran
Advocates:K.N. Tripathi, Adv.
DispositionRevision dismissed
Excerpt:
civil - scope of case decided - section 115 of code of civil procedure, 1908 - court exercising judicial discretion - for granting leave to deliver interrogatories - it is not adjudication of some right or obligation - order not amount to case decided. - .....the court held that when the court exercise its judicial discretion in granting or refusing to grant leave to deliver interrogatories, it cannot be said to be an adjudication of some right or obligation of the parties in controversy. the order does not amount to case decided. it is analogous to overruling or sustaining an objection to a question put to a witness. these are purely interlocutory orders which are not revisable.3. learned counsel for the applicant relies upon shamrao v. moti ram . in that case, there is a passing observation that such an order amounts to case decided. no reasons have been given. i am unable to agree with it, in my opinion, an order refusing to grant leave to a party to deliver interrogatories is not a case decided within meaning of section 115, c. p......
Judgment:
ORDER

Satish Chandra, C.J.

1. This revision is directed against an order refusing to give leave to the defendant to deliver interrogatories to the plaintiff,

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff opposite-party raised a preliminary objection that the impugned order does not amount to case decided within the meaning of Section 115 C. P. C. He relies on Y. Venkateswara Rao v. K. Nagamma AIR 1972 Mys 254. There, after consideration of the Supreme Court decisions, the Court held that when the Court exercise its judicial discretion in granting or refusing to grant leave to deliver interrogatories, it cannot be said to be an adjudication of some right or obligation of the parties in controversy. The order does not amount to case decided. It is analogous to overruling or sustaining an objection to a question put to a witness. These are purely interlocutory orders which are not revisable.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant relies upon Shamrao v. Moti Ram . In that case, there is a passing observation that such an order amounts to case decided. No reasons have been given. I am unable to agree with it, In my opinion, an order refusing to grant leave to a party to deliver interrogatories is not a case decided within meaning of Section 115, C. P. C.

4. This revision is accordingly dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //