Lawyer Cannot Swear Affidavit On Behalf Of Client Unless Facts Are Within Personal Knowledge: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that a lawyer for the plaintiff cannot file an affidavit on behalf of the plaintiff seeking production of documents. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 514]
Justice Easwaran S delivered the judgement in an original petition.
The case arose when the counsel appearing for the plaintiff produced certain documents on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit for partition. The affidavit accompanying the application was sworn to by the lawyer himself. The trial court allowed the same on the ground that the relevance and the admissibility of the documents could be considered at the appropriate stage of the proceedings. This order was challenged before the High court.
The Court noted that the plaintiff is entitled to produce additional documents, provided that the conditions prescribed under the relevant rules are satisfied. It further added that the plaintiff has to satisfy the relevancy of the documents and also its admissibility in the nature of the dispute involved in the suit.
The Court observed that a sworn in affidavit on behalf of the plaintiff is beyond the authority conferred upon the counsel for the plaintiff under the Advocates Act.
“It is beyond comprehension as to how the plaintiff's counsel could have sworn an affidavit on behalf of the plaintiff seeking permission to produce additional documents. Such an affidavit is certainly beyond the authority conferred upon the learned counsel concerned under the provisions of the Advocates Act.” Court noted.
The Court noted that in Abdul Kareem v State of Kerala [2006 (2) KLT 408], it was held that an affidavit sworn by counsel can be accepted only where the facts disclosed are within the personal knowledge of the lawyer concerned, such as an application for condonation of delay.
It was observed that in the present case, the affidavit accompanying the application are beyond the personal knowledge of the concerned counsel and hence the trial court erred in accepting the affidavit.
The Court thus set aside the order accepting the affidavit and the consequent IA's were dismissed. The court further added that the plaintiffs are at liberty to file an appropriate application, supported by an affidavit sworn to by them, seeking production of documents.
Case Title: Balan and Anr. v Parameswaran and Ors.
Case No: O.P(C) 1043/ 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 514
Counsel for Petitioner: Jacob Sebastian, Shamseeta. C. Ashraf, Winston K.V, Anu Jacob, Anjana Krishnan, Vincent C.J
Counsel for Respondent: M.C. Gopi, K. Mohanakannan