No obligation on bank to reply to interrogatories that were inappropriate

Whether plaintiff bank is required to answer outstanding interrogatories – defendant alleges fraud on the part of the plaintiff bank - interrogatories had been answered nine months after service but answers allegedly unsatisfactory – defendant says no difference between unsatisfactory answers and no answers procedurally – plaintiff bank says motion resolved and only costs outstanding – usually motion would be resolved but parties previously proceeded before the court on the merits of the application – five categories of interrogatory bank is not required to reply to – meanings and effects of documents – whether documents were forged – imprecisely worded interrogatories – actions relating to a third party not under the control of the bank or even party to the proceedings – matters of evidence –motion had not been resolved but has now been heard and dismissed.