Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5206 OF 2009 Dr.Sudhir S. Joshi & ors. ... Petitioners v/s Mohan Nanjundaya & anr. ... Respondents Mr.K.R.Parekh with Mr.Kunjal Sanghavi i/by M/s. V.R.Parekh & Co. for the petitioners. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 6TH JULY, 2009 P.C.: 1. The petitioners have approached this Court against the order passed by the Trial Court on 17.4.2009 by which the application filed by the petitioner to delete the averments made in the affidavit, which are beyond the scope of the pleadings, has been rejected. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the affidavit filed by the respondents by way of examination-in-chief contains averments which are not found in the pleadings. documents which are not referred to in the pleadings are also annexed to the affidavit. The Trial Court has, in my opinion, rightly rejected the application. The Trial Court has relied on the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of Amir Trading Corporation Ltd. v/s. Shapoorji Data Processing Ltd., reported in A.I.R. 2004 S.C. 335. 2. The contention of the learned advocate for the petitioner that such averments must be struck off and that the petitioner should not be burdened with the task of cross-examining the plaintiff in respect of such averments or documents, in my opinion, is unsustainable. It is always open to the defendant while cross-examining the plaintiff or his witness to secure an admission from the witness that the averments contained in the affidavit are not borne out from the pleadings on record. In any case, if such an admission is not obtained, it will always be open for the Trial Court to consider whether the averments in the affidavit in examination-in-chief are beyond the pale of the plaint. 3. Writ petition rejected. .....