Can a plaintiff administer a general roving interrogatory as to documents?

Again in Hall v. Truman et al, 29 Ch. D. 307, it was held that after a defendant has made a sufficient affidavit of documents the plaintiff will not be allowed to administer to him a general roving interrogatory as to documents, his possession of the effect of which would be to compel the defendant to make a further affidavit as to documents.

This was followed in Nicholl v. Wheeler, 17 Q.B.D. 101, on appeal in this case at p. 319, Cotton, L.J. said: A party who has made an affidavit of documents cannot be ordered to make a further affidavit unless, either upon the face of the affidavit itself, or of the documents referred to in it, or in his pleading, there is something, which affords a presumption that he has in his possession other relevant documents besides those the possession of which he has admitted.