http://notes-law.blogspot.in/2008/08/hindu-law-part-1.

html

Sir
The importance of verification is to test the genuineness and the authenticity o
f the allegations and also to make the deponent responsible for the allegations.
In essence, verification is required to enable the court to find out as to whet
her it will be safe to act on such affidavit.
AIR 1970 SC 652.
It is just possible that the court entertains a doubt with regard to the very au
thorship or identity of the persons who gave a particular affidavit. To contend
that the court has no power to clear its doubt, but that the court has to either
submissively accept or arbitrarily reject the doubtful affidavit would tantamou
nt to reducing the proceedings of the court to a mere mockery.
1981 (1) ALT 490 = AIR 1981 AP 406.
As in the case putforth by you it is clear that the deponents were examined unde
r the oath before the court. Then the court cannot take such plea and if it thin
ks it is fatal then it ought to have directed the petitioner to file fresh affid
avits.
Now coming to the part of the applicability of CPC in RCC cases as per the rulin
g 1967 (2) An. W. R 479 it was held that
It must be remembered that where one statute deals with a subject in general ter
ms, such as CPC and another deals with a part of the same subject in the prescri
bed way such as Rent Control Act and the rules made there under, the two should
be harmonized, if possible. But, if there is any conflict, the special or local
law would naturally prevail. But in case the special or local law is silent on a
ny particular aspect of the procedure, Section 4 of CPC does not stand in the wa
y in having recourse to the relevant provision of the CPC
But this finding is under AP Rent Control Act.