Mangat Mal (Dead) by LRs and Anr. v Smt. Punni Devi and Anr.

Facts

• An affidavit had been filed in support of a party's case, containing statements that did not clearly indicate whether they were based on the deponent's own personal knowledge or on information received from another source, or on belief
• A question arose as to the evidentiary weight and admissibility of such an affidavit, given this lack of clarity

Issue

1. What are the essential requirements for a valid and effective affidavit under Order XIX CPC, and what is the consequence of an affidavit that fails to distinguish between personal knowledge and information or belief.

Held

• The Supreme Court held that an affidavit must clearly state which parts of its content are based on the deponent's personal knowledge, and which parts are based on information received or belief, and where the latter, the source of that information should ordinarily be disclosed
• An affidavit that is vague or fails to make this distinction is of diminished evidentiary value, since the court cannot properly assess the reliability of statements whose basis is unclear
• Courts are entitled to disregard or accord reduced weight to portions of an affidavit that do not meet these requirements, particularly where the affidavit is being relied upon as a substitute for oral testimony on a contested matter
• The judgment reinforced that affidavits, though a convenient procedural tool, are not exempt from basic standards of evidentiary reliability

Ratio Decidendi

A valid affidavit under Order XIX CPC must clearly distinguish between statements made on the deponent's personal knowledge and those based on information or belief, disclosing the source where relevant; an affidavit that fails to observe this distinction, or is vague on this point, carries diminished evidentiary value and may be disregarded by the court.