https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457451 Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC requires examination-in-chief to be filed by affidavit, and Order XIX Rule 3 confines affidavits to facts within the deponent's knowledge. An affidavit in evidence should not go beyond the pleadings or contain surmise, conjecture, or argument, but it may expand factually on pleaded matters and include facts personally known to the deponent. Objections that portions are beyond pleadings or otherwise inadmissible are ordinarily to be raised and decided at final adjudication, with cross-examination proceeding in the meantime. Deletion of affidavit portions is usually unwarranted unless the material is wholly irrelevant or plainly beyond pleadings; the direction to file a fresh affidavit was therefore unwarranted and the affidavit was to be read as filed. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Sep 2024 20:17:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457451 Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC requires examination-in-chief to be filed by affidavit, and Order XIX Rule 3 confines affidavits to facts within the deponent's knowledge. An affidavit in evidence should not go beyond the pleadings or contain surmise, conjecture, or argument, but it may expand factually on pleaded matters and include facts personally known to the deponent. Objections that portions are beyond pleadings or otherwise inadmissible are ordinarily to be raised and decided at final adjudication, with cross-examination proceeding in the meantime. Deletion of affidavit portions is usually unwarranted unless the material is wholly irrelevant or plainly beyond pleadings; the direction to file a fresh affidavit was therefore unwarranted and the affidavit was to be read as filed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457451