TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 294X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revision petitioner is not maintainable, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Revision petitioner seeking relief of declaration and other reliefs and therefore, the revision petitioner should have examined witnesses to prove his case at first instance. A careful reading of the pleadings in the above said plaint and written statement revealed that the onus is only on the revision petitioner to prove the contentions and hence the revision petitioner should prove the contentions raised in the plaint by adducing reliable oral and documentary evidence. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that in view of the averments made in the written statement the onus is only on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ake of convenience, the plaintiff in the original suit is referred as revision petitioner and the defendants in the original suit are referred as respondents here after. 3. The revision petitioner has filed a suit for declaration that he is not a Director of the 2nd respondent company and consequently granted permanent injunction restraining the 1st respondent from proceeding to recover any dues of the 2nd respondent company from the revision petitioner. On the side of the 1st respondent filed detailed written statement and the trial court has framed necessary issues and then the trial was also commenced. 4. In part heard stage, on the side of the revision petitioner one C.K.Simon, who is brother-in-law of the revision petitioner file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he revision petitioner jointly and severally liable for the payment of taxes and penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Further, the affidavit filed by brother-in-law of the revision petitioner is not entertainable since he has not connected with the above said company in any way and hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6. The trial court has considered both sides contentions and finally dismissed the above said petition. Aggrieved over the above said finding of the trial court, this revision petition has been filed. 7. Admittedly, the revision petitioner has not filed any affidavit. Only the alleged brother-in-law of the revision petitioner namely one C.K.Simon alone filed the affidavit. No sufficient reason has been stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in 2007 (3) LW 1044 (R.M.Bedi v. M/s.Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd., another) and submitted that a person who is conversant with the facts of the case, can file the affidavit and therefore, no illegality in the affidavit filed by the third party in the present case. A careful reading of the above said decision revealed that the above said facts are not applicable to the facts of the present case. In the above said case, the plaintiff in the suit was a old man living in Germany. In the above said circumstances, the counsel on record filed an affidavit by stating that he was well aware of the facts of the case and explained the circumstances under which, the defendant was set exparte and the above said fact was only within the knowledge of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
