Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 766 views

    Chetan Bhagat: Ordinary Original Civil Juricdiction Civil Suit No. 319 of 2012

    Uploaded by

    Kishan Patel
    The document is an application filed in the City Civil and Sessions Court of Mumbai by Raju Hirani against Chetan Bhagat. [1] Hirani seeks an order directing Bhagat to answer interrogatories regarding a pending civil suit between the two parties. [2] Hirani believes the entire case can be decided on its merits through discovery by interrogatories to obtain admissions and relevant information. [3] He has attached a list of 7 questions seeking answers from Bhagat on issues like similarities between a script and film, compensation provided, and statements made regarding any alleged fraud or misrepresentation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Chetan Bhagat: Ordinary Original Civil Juricdiction Civil Suit No. 319 of 2012

    Uploaded by

    Kishan Patel
    766 views5 pages
    The document is an application filed in the City Civil and Sessions Court of Mumbai by Raju Hirani against Chetan Bhagat. [1] Hirani seeks an order directing Bhagat to answer interrogatories regarding a pending civil suit between the two parties. [2] Hirani believes the entire case can be decided on its merits through discovery by interrogatories to obtain admissions and relevant information. [3] He has attached a list of 7 questions seeking answers from Bhagat on issues like similarities between a script and film, compensation provided, and statements made regarding any alleged fraud or misrepresentation.

    Original Title

    INTERROGATORIES

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document is an application filed in the City Civil and Sessions Court of Mumbai by Raju Hirani against Chetan Bhagat. [1] Hirani seeks an order directing Bhagat to answer interrogatories regarding a pending civil suit between the two parties. [2] Hirani believes the entire case can be decided on its merits through discovery by interrogatories to obtain admissions and relevant information. [3] He has attached a list of 7 questions seeking answers from Bhagat on issues like similarities between a script and film, compensation provided, and statements made regarding any alleged fraud or misrepresentation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    766 views5 pages

    Chetan Bhagat: Ordinary Original Civil Juricdiction Civil Suit No. 319 of 2012

    Uploaded by

    Kishan Patel
    The document is an application filed in the City Civil and Sessions Court of Mumbai by Raju Hirani against Chetan Bhagat. [1] Hirani seeks an order directing Bhagat to answer interrogatories regarding a pending civil suit between the two parties. [2] Hirani believes the entire case can be decided on its merits through discovery by interrogatories to obtain admissions and relevant information. [3] He has attached a list of 7 questions seeking answers from Bhagat on issues like similarities between a script and film, compensation provided, and statements made regarding any alleged fraud or misrepresentation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 5
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The key takeaways are that this is a civil suit filed by the plaintiff Chetan Bhagat against the defendant Raju Hirani. The defendant has filed an application for interrogatories under Order 11 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure to obtain information and admissions from the plaintiff.

    The case is a civil suit filed by the plaintiff Chetan Bhagat against the defendant Raju Hirani.

    The defendant is asking the plaintiff to admit or deny on oath the document list and questions that will be submitted by the defendant.

    IN THE HON’BLE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT, MUMBAI.

    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURICDICTION

    Civil suit No. 319 of 2012

    Chetan Bhagat s/o Shekhar Bhagat, Hindu, aged 40 years,


    r/o 121/C, Jalsa bungalows, Santacruz, Mumbai, 302021. [Plaintiff]

    Versus

    Raju Hirani s/o Sanjay Hirani, Hindu, aged 43 years,


    r/o G-22, Galaxy Apartment, Bandra, Mumbai, 302011. [Defendant]

    I.A. No – 3

    Mr. Raju Hirani [Applicant]

    v/s

    Mr. Chetan Bhagat [Opponent]

    APPLICATION U/O-11 RULE-1 CPC FOR INTERROGATORIES


    CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE – APPENDEX C-FORM NO 1
    INTERROGATORIES (O. 11, r. 1)

    1
    The Applicant abovementioned most respectfully submits as herein under: -

    i) That the above titled case is pending in this Hon’ble Court.

    ii) As the matter of facts, the entire case can be decided on merit via discovery by

    Interrogatories under Order 11 of the code of civil procedure.

    iii) Therefore, the applicant requests that the opponent may be ordered to admit or to

    deny on oath the document list and the question list which is to submitted by the

    applicant.

    iv) That, the reason behind filing this application is to save the expenses by enabling

    the applicant to obtain from the opponent necessary and relevant information to

    the issues in the dispute between the parties and to obtain admissions on the facts

    which the opponent needs to prove or have as issue with.

    v) That, all the details relating the interrogatories and the list of the questions will be

    submitted to the court by the applicant after once the court passes this order of

    interrogatories. (o.11, r.1)

    vi) That, the present filed application should be passed in the interest of the justice

    and as the court thinks fit as this order can either play major part to support the

    case of the opponent or it will destroy it completely.

    vii) That, under Rule-1 of Order-11 CPC a party is given the power to interrogate his

    opposite party with a view to discover what case he has to meet and facts to relied

    upon and to find out what is really in issue.

    viii) That, if the present application is permitted by this Hon’ble Court, the time for

    concluding following trial would be cut short and will also save the expenses of

    the litigants.

    ix) The list of questions is attached in Annexure A. The defendant is willing to

    pay the costs.

    2
    PRAYER: -

    In the light of the above, the applicant in the above matter most respectfully and

    humbly prays that this Hon’ble court under the circumstances that the Interrogatories

    application may kindly accepted and allow the applicant to put the Interrogatories

    after the required notice, in the interest of justice.

    Place: Mumbai (Maharashtra) Mr. Raju


    Hirani

    Date: 20th June, 2012 (Applicant)

    3
    ANNEXURE A
    (ORDER 11 RULE 4)

    List of Questions

    Interrogatories on behalf of the above-named Applicant (Defendant), Mr. Raju

    Hirani, for the examination of the above-named Opponent (Plaintiff) Mr. Chetan

    Bhagat:

    1. What are the exact similarities between the script of the play and the film?

    2. Was the plaintiff not given compensation for the entire six months he worked

    with the defendant by cheque?

    3. If you contend that the defendant has committed fraud and misused your

    playwright without your permission, present the circumstances which state the

    basis of your contention.

    4. Was the plaintiff not given compensation for the credit of the original script?

    5. Identify every representation that you contend is false or misleading that the

    Defendants expressly made in their statements and state the basis of your

    contention.

    6. Did any kind of contact that had taken place between you and the defendant

    that had taken place after you came to know about the fraud.

    7. Please explain the conversation under question 6.

    The Opponent (plaintiff), Mr. Chetan Bhagat, is required to answer the

    interrogatories numbered 1 to 7.

    4
    Date – 20th June 2012 Sahil Shah

    Advocat

    You might also like