Introduction:
After the plaint has been presented and written statement is put before the court, and it may appear to either party that the case is not sufficient or a certain part of the pleadings, the party may request the court to let them exercise the tool of Interrogatories. The tool is available in order to entitle the parties to know beforehand all material facts and evidence possessed by the opposite party. Having said that, the parties do not possess the right to know a complete list of evidence but it is a safeguard against unscrupulous litigation destroying or defeating ends of justice. The apparatus is provided to avoid misuse of judicial machinery and it’s time.
Concept of Interrogatories
Word ‘interrogatory’ simply means to ask questions and inquire closely or thoroughly[1]. They come to play when any information as to fact is required by one party from the adverse party. On permission of the court, such adverse party may be supplied with a series of question. This series of questions is formally known as Interrogatories. The focus of delivering an interrogatory is to ascertain the nature of the case brought. The interrogatories are used to gather material for either supporting own case or destroying the case of the opponent.[2] The impeachment of credits and facts stated is usually the task of interrogatories.[3]
Laws Related to Interrogatories
The concept of interrogatories is an important part of procedural law. The Civil Procedural law in its section 30 read with order XI formulate a legislative framework of interrogatories. It is a discretionary power of the court before which such proceeding is held.
Object of Interrogatories
The Object of Interrogatories can be understood as twin character
- Firstly, to know the nature of the case
- Secondly, to support own case [4]
- either, by directly, obtaining admissions[5]
- or, by indirectly, impeaching or destructing case of opponent[6]
The primary object underlying this procedure is to delimit areas of issue, save money and efforts of parties in enabling material facts and evidence which otherwise had been a subject matter to be proved with oral or documentary evidence.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has supported to exercise the practice of issuance of interrogatories without any barrier from mere petty technicalities[7]
Authority to Administer Interrogatories
As the interrogatories are the instrument to built one’s case at cost of destroying adverse party’s case, it is a general practice that parties provide interrogatories to the opposite party. There is no legal binding as to who should administer to whom. Thus a plaintiff may administer the interrogatory to the defendant. The defendant on other hands is not barred to administer the interrogatories to the plaintiff. The administration of such interrogatory without any doubt is dependent on the previous sanction of the court. The sole criteria for administrating interrogatory are being enlisted in the case as a party. In Exceptional Cases, the courts have even allowed the interrogatories to be issued even on Co-plaintiffs or co-defendants.[8]
Authority Against Whom such Interrogatories are Issued
Interrogatories are issued on opposite parties hence may be issued by the plaintiff on the defendant or vice versa. But the essential condition to be a subject to an interrogatory is being a party to the suit. Although Law expressly doesn’t prohibit the issuance of interrogatory over a third party but under the Indian Evidence Act, such interrogatory will be hit by relevancy at the first place. The courts may issue the order allowing issuance of interrogatory over the third party when such a person becomes relevant in relation to a material fact. The person not arrayed as a party become subject of an interrogatory if he by substance and in reality is an agent or principal to the parties to the suit.
In various cases, such interrogatories have been issued over governments also[9]. In case the party to whom such interrogatory is to be issued suffers from a legal disability, such questionnaire must be served to the next friend or guardian ad litem. The rule 23 to Order XI discuss the procedure when there is legal incapacity in form of minority, unsoundness or otherwise.
Form of Interrogatories
Form 1 and 2 to Appendix C provides for the general format to the Interrogatory. The necessary modification and variations are done in the said Forms for making up of the valid interrogatories. Form 3 provides for necessary attachment of an Affidavit along with its issuance.
Objections to Interrogatories
The parties are well in their rights to refuse or object in answering the certain question of in full the interrogatory. Such objection may be based on lines of areas where cross-examination under Section 149-153 of Indian Evidence Act operate. The questions which are scandalous, irrelevant, malafide, immaterial, privilege or otherwise not required in law to be answered, can be objected for the questionnaire.
Rules Governing Interrogatories
The combined reading of Section 30 and Order XI provides for some rules which are been put comprehensively as following. These rules are to be kept in mind while making discovery by interrogatories.
- The administration of interrogatories are subject to the leave of the court and subjects along with conditions prescribed for it as per Rule 1 to Order XI
- The subject matters of the interrogatories must be submitted before the Court at least seven days prior to delivery to the other party.
- The parties should restrict to one interrogatory to the same party in compliance to single leave order of the court. But in exceptional cases, additional interrogatories may be allowed for the same party.
- The interrogatories are filled after the filing of written statements so no leave be granted for interrogatories before the filing of written statements.[10] Although leave may be granted in absence of written statement after the expiry of the period to file written statement and no extension is asked for.[11]
- In a case where the interrogatories are to be served over a juristic person, it must be administered to officer or member of such cooperation or body under Rule 5 of the Order XI
- In case of lunatic or minor, such interrogatories be served to Next Friend or Guardian Ad Litem
- The interrogatories and answer be delivered on affidavit in the prescribed form. Such answers be filed within 10 days or as reasonably prescribed by the court.
- The questions in the interrogatories should have reasonable nexus to the question before the Court. They must be questions of fact[12] and not inferences, conclusion or construction from documents.[13]
- Interrogatories must not be allowed on premature stage and must not be scandalous, vexatious, irrelevant, unreasonable, malafide, injurious to the public interest and of fishing nature.
- Any interrogatory if are of abovementioned nature must be stuck down with cost.
- The cost of service of interrogatory must be borne by the party administrating it irrespective of its result.
- The parties are eligible to use the material information during the trial as evidence.
- The party which willfully don’t answer the interrogatories be called before court and if don’t answer the question, he may be even struck down as plaintiff or defendant to the suit
Cases where Interrogatories be Allowed and Disallowed
The ongoing rules allow interrogatories in all cases where the answers may aid the case of the applicant and destroy the case of the other party. The right is a precious weapon and may not be deprived without reasonable grounds.[14] The utility of interrogatories should not be limited by technical grounds and should be exercise freehandedly to shorten litigation, save expense and meet ends of justice.[15] So the interrogatories are used in subjects of:
- Matter directly in issue and not on issues on a dispute which may arise
- Question in the suit if sufficiently relevant.
The interrogatories are forbidden to be issued in following matters:
- Documents of facts constituting the evidence of adversary[16]
- Privilege and confidential communication between a party and legal advisor
- Disclosure of information is detrimental to Public Interest
- Scandalous, malafide, unrelated and irrelevant material to the case
- Material in nature of cross-examination
- Question of law
Non-Compliance of Issued Interrogatories
The party who is provided with interrogatory without any reasonable reason fails to answer the questions stated then following is there remedy available. The party who administrated the interrogatory may apply before the court for the abovesaid matter and Court may in its due power call upon the person and compel him to answer the question by oral examination or on affidavit[17]
Appeal
The orders granting or rejecting the prayer for interrogatory do not constitute a decree or appealable order. Therefore, there is no appeal allowed against such order.
Revision
The orders granting or rejecting the prayer for interrogatory under the ambit of Section 115 CPC is deemed as a case decided. The nature of power to allow or disallow interrogatories is discretionary and need to be exercised liberally. It is a common practice that High Courts refrain from interfering in such matters. The High Court intervene or interfere in such cases when there I miscarriage of justice, prima facie wrong or material illegality present.[18]
Conclusion
The interrogatories are a concept provided in Procedural law to cut cost, time and fictitious litigation. The idea is to avoid any uncertainty and surprise while litigating. The courts are asked to grant leave for allowing the interrogatory. But it is often seen that this boon often turns to bane in several cases where questions are just framed in a manner to annoy, insult, injure, embarrass or scandalize the other party. The court while granting the leave must check for any possible abuse of such a tool. The interrogation should not be used as a weapon to see what the other party or the opponent has. In other words, interrogatory can’t be used to check how other parties will come up in court and defend his case.
Additionally, the power to grant leave for interrogatories must be used judiciously as the higher judicial minds usually do not interfere with the said decisions. These orders are non-appealable and revisional powers are also rarely used. The burden of proof too is greater in order to seek intervention on the ground of miscarriage of justice.
References:
[1] Conscience Oxford English Dictionary (2002) at pg 740
[2] Raj Narain v Indira Nehru Gandhi (1972) 3 SCC 850
[3] Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin (2012) 8 SCC 148
[4] Bhakt Charan Mallik v. Nataorar Mallik AIR 1991 Ori 319
[5] Ganga Devi v.Krushna Prasad AIR 1967 Ori 19
[6] Thakur Prasad v. Mohm Sohayal AIR 1977 Pat 233
[7] P Balan v Central Bank of India AIR 2000 Ker 24
[8] Shaw v. Smith (1886) LR 18 QBD 193 (CA)
[9] Attorney General v Gaskill (1882) LR 20 Ch D 519
[10] Union Bank of London v. Manby (1879) LR 13 ChD 239(AD)
[11] Cashin v Craddock (1876) LR 2 ChD 140
[12] Model Farm Dairies v. Newman 1943 KB 5
[13] Nittomoye Dasse v. Soobul Chunder Law , ILR (1895)23 Cal 117
[14] Ramlalasao v. Tansingh AIR 1952 Nag
[15] Delhi Vanspati Syndicate v. KC Chawla AIR 1983 J&K 65
[16] Knapp v Harvey (1911) 2 KB 725 at Pg 732
[17] Shyamal Kumar v Godavari Devi AIR 1977 NOC 120
[18] Kathick Chandra v. Amal Kumar (1964) 68 CWN 804
0 Comments