AAP convener and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal seeking certain records from the officials of Delhi District and Cricket Association (DDCA) had filed an application in the Delhi High Court. Kejriwal filed the application in order to \u201cconfront\u201d Finance Minister Arun Jaitley during his cross-examination in the defamation case. Jaitley had filed a case against CM Arvind Kejriwal and five other leaders of AAP seeking damages of Rs 10 crore. Joint Registrar Pankaj Gupta issued a notice to Arun Jaitley and sought a reply to the application by July 28. Kejriwal is seeking minutes of the meeting in order to counter Jaitley. According to Indian Express report, Kejriwal's counsel Anupam Srivastava had filed an application according to which the case is at a stage in which Jaitley is being 'cross-examined' and the further interrogation of the BJP leader is supposed to take place on July 28 and 31. It is for this reason that Kejriwal is seeking some records from the officials of DDCA, Srivastava said. According to Indian Express reports, the application demanded \u201cminutes of the meeting\/minute book of the general body meetings of the official concerned of DDCA between the years 1999 and December 2014\u201d and \u201cminute book for the executive committee\/board of directors between the years 1999 to December 2014\u201d. The application further said, \u201cthat no prejudice will be caused to the plaintiff (Jaitley) in case, the present application is allowed. However, the defendants (Kejriwal and other AAP leaders) will suffer deeply in case the same is dismissed.\u201d The application further added that the court can summon the concerned officer from DDCA with the respective documents and records. You may also like to watch: When the court asked Amit Mahajan, Centre\u2019s standing counsel, whether he objected to any clause in the application, he said it was filed under the wrong provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). Mahajan said the application was filed under Order XVI Rule 1 of the CCP according to which the list of the concerned witnesses had to be handed to the court in prior for the summoning of records. He said that the application had to be filed under Order XVI Rule 6 of the CCP which would have been the correct provision for the summoning of records from a third party. Mahajan said that further objections will be mentioned in the reply.