Interrogatories are written questions administered by one party to another in a civil suit, with leave of the court, requiring the opposite party to answer on oath by affidavit. Under Indian law, interrogatories are governed by Section 30 read with Order XI Rules 1 to 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and serve as a pre-trial discovery mechanism to obtain admissions, narrow the issues in controversy, and reduce the cost and duration of litigation.
Legal definition
Section 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides the substantive power:
Section 30: In any suit the Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on the application of any party — (a) make such orders as may be necessary or reasonable in all matters relating to the delivery and answering of interrogatories.
Order XI Rules 1-11 prescribe the detailed procedure:
Order XI Rule 1: In any suit the plaintiff or defendant by leave of the Court may deliver interrogatories in writing for the examination of the opposite parties or any one or more of such parties, and such interrogatories when delivered shall have a note at the foot thereof stating which of such interrogatories each of such persons is required to answer.
The answers to interrogatories must be given by affidavit within ten days (or such time as the court directs) and can be used as evidence in the suit. A party cannot be compelled to answer any interrogatory that the court considers irrelevant, prolix, oppressive, unnecessary, or scandalous.
How courts have interpreted this term
Martin & Harris Ltd. v. VIth Additional District Judge [AIR 1998 SC 492]
The Supreme Court held that interrogatories must have a reasonably close connection with the matters in question in the suit. The Court clarified that interrogatories serve a dual function: to understand the opponent's case and to bolster one's own case either directly by eliciting admissions or indirectly by undermining the opponent's arguments. However, interrogatories cannot be used as a substitute for cross-examination.
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Babulal [AIR 1990 All 199]
The Court held that the purpose of interrogatories is to narrow the controversy, reduce costs, and enable a party to gather pertinent information and secure admissions on relevant matters that would otherwise require evidence at trial. The questions must be relevant to the issues in the suit and must not be fishing in nature.
Why this matters
Interrogatories represent an underutilised but powerful discovery tool in Indian civil litigation. In a legal system where trials can stretch over years, the ability to secure admissions through interrogatories before trial can significantly shorten proceedings. An admission obtained through an interrogatory has the same evidentiary effect as an admission in a pleading — it is binding on the party and can be relied upon without further proof.
For practitioners, the strategic use of interrogatories requires careful drafting. Each question must be relevant to a matter in issue and must not be framed so broadly as to be oppressive or vexatious. The court retains discretion to strike out interrogatories that are prolix, unnecessary, or scandalous. The most effective interrogatories are those that force the opponent to commit to specific factual positions, which can then be used to impeach the opponent's testimony at trial.
A critical limitation is that interrogatories can only be administered to parties to the suit — they cannot be served on third-party witnesses. For non-party witnesses, the appropriate remedy is a commission for examination under Order XXVI or a subpoena to attend court.
Related terms
Related discovery tools:
Broader concepts:
Frequently asked questions
Can interrogatories be used in all types of civil suits?
Yes. Interrogatories are available in any suit under the CPC, including commercial suits. However, the court may refuse to order interrogatories if it considers that discovery is not necessary for the fair disposal of the suit or for saving costs. In practice, interrogatories are most commonly used in commercial disputes and intellectual property cases.
What happens if a party refuses to answer interrogatories?
If a party fails to answer interrogatories within the prescribed time, the court may make such order as it thinks just, including an order that the action be dismissed, or that the defence be struck out and judgment entered accordingly. Under Order XI Rule 21, if a party fails to comply with an order for discovery or interrogatories, the court may impose similar consequences.
Can interrogatories substitute for cross-examination?
No. The Supreme Court has held that interrogatories cannot substitute for cross-examination, as the scope of interrogatories is much narrower. Interrogatories are limited to matters in question in the suit, while cross-examination may extend to testing credibility and exploring matters not strictly in issue. Interrogatories are a pre-trial tool for narrowing issues; cross-examination is a trial tool for testing evidence.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.