9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disputed the claim of the Bank by filing written statement as well as affidavit on evidence. Defendant No. 5 deposed as DW-1 on behalf of the defendant Nos. 1 to 5. 2. It appears from the record that in answer to the questions put to the said witness, the learned Trial Judge, inter alia, recorded the following three sentences : "I cannot say if the claim of the bank is correct or not. I cannot say off hand the exact amount of debt due to the bank from the Respondent No. 1. We have paid nothing against the claim of the bank." 3. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application alleging that the evidence recorded by the Tribunal below did not reflect the actual answers given by the deponent. 4. In paragraph 5 of the said app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same. Shortly thereafter depositions were typed out and the petitioner was asked by the concerned stenographer to read the deposition and sign it. After going through the deposition, the petitioner was surprised to find that it has been wrongly recorded that the petitioner did not know whether the claim of the plaintiff Bank was correct or not. According to the petitioner, the said recording was absolutely incorrect. 6. It appears from the record that no written objection was given to the aforesaid application filed by the petitioner. But at the time of hearing of the application, the application was orally opposed by the Bank. By the order impugned, in this application, the learned Trial Judge has rejected the said application with c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y be inferred that the said witness was not aware of the exact amount due and payable to the bank, that fact does not mean that the first sentence should also be recorded although the petitioner really denied such suggestion. Therefore, I delete the first sentence of the aforesaid three sentences, as it was not the real answer given by the DW-1; the other two sentences will, however, remain. 11. I, thus, allow the application thereby deleting the aforesaid sentence from the deposition of the DW-1 as it is established that that very sentence was not uttered by the DW-1. However, the other part of the deposition will remain as it is. The Bank, if so desires, may further cross-examine the DW-1 in view of deletion of the aforesaid sentence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
