CPC Asim
CPC Asim
CIVIL
PROCEDURE
As Per Syllabus of Facult of Law, University of Delhi
(Also useful for Judicial Service Exam)
For students of
Campus Law Centre, Law Centre-I
Law Centre – II, Delhi University
AASIM YEZDANI
Exam Pressure
Alcases are explained on YouTube
8709796188
1, Definitions 1-5
Decree 1
a) Essential Requirements of a Decree 1
b) Types of Decrees 1
c) Preliminary Decree 1
d) Final Decree 1
Order
2
a) Common Points betweenOrder and Decree
2
b) Difference between Decree and Order
2
Judgement
3
Legal Representative
3
a) Examples of Legal representative
3
b) Decree against wrong Legal Representative
Mesne profits
4
a) Against whom mesne profits can be passed
5
b) Object of Mesne Profit
5
c) Deduction on mesne Profits
5
iv
2. IndianBank v. MaharashtraState Cooperative Marketing
Federation Ltd, AIR 1998 SC 1952
3
.
Iftikhar Ahmed Syed Meharban Ai, AIR 1974 SC 749
12
14
U.P. v. Nawab Hussain, AIR 1977 SC 1680 15
4. State of
CA. Balakrishnan v. Commissioner Corporation of
5.
Madras, AIR 2003 Mad, 170 17
and
Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1962 SC1314 32
7. Koppi Setty v. Ratnam v. Pamarti Venka
2009 RLR 27
(NSC) 33
8. Gill& Co. v. Bimla Kumnari,
1986 RLR 370 35
7. Reference 37-41
Reference (Section 113, CPC, 1908) 37
a) Purpose of Reference 37
b) Essential Conditions for Reference 37
Review (Section 114, Order 47, CPC, 1908) 38
a) Who may apply for Review under Section 114, CPOc 38
b) Order 47, Rule 1 outlines the conditions for a review of
judgment 38
Revision (Section 115, CPC, 1908) 39
a) Reasons for the Revision 39
Case Laws (All cases are explained on YouTube)
9 Haridas Das v. Smt. Usha Rani Banik, 2006 (3) SCALE 287 40
vi
10. Amendment of Pleadings
Amendment of Pleadings (Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC, 1908)
47-53
Pleadings
of 47
Importance of Amendment
47
Essential Conditions for Granting Amendment of Pleadings
48
Refusal to amend pleadings OCcurs under specific
circumstances 48
Cacelaws (Allcases are explained
on YouTube)
v. National
Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal
11. Building Material
Supply Co., AIR 1969 S.C, 1267
48
12 M/s Ganesh irading GO. V. Moji Ram, AIR1978 SC 484
50
1.3. Dalip Kaur v. Major Singh, AIR 1996 P &H 107
51
14 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai, (2000) 1
SCC 712 52
Order 9, Rule 13 58
Case Laws (All cases are explained on YouTube)
16. Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal, AlR 1955 SC 425 58
17. Aajni Kumar v. Suresh Kumar Malhotra, 2003 (3)
60
SCALE 434
61
18. Bhanu Kumar Jain v, ArchanaKumar, AIR2005 SC 626
vii
(All cases are explained on YouTube)
Case Laws
v. Bhai Mool Singh, AIR 1958S.C. 32
19. Santosh Kumar v. Basic
65
20. M/s Mechalec Engineers and Manufacturers
EquipmentCorporation, AlR 1977 SC 577 66
AIR 2000 SC 2548
21. ONGC Ltd. v. State Bank of India, 68
Legislation:
Procedure, 1908
1.
Code of Civil
Materials on
Civil Procedure
Cases and
1
University of Delhi, Delhi.
Law, Delhi University.
Question Papers Referred- Channel
Exam
Pressure:YouTube
3.
ix
TOPIC 1
DEFINITIONS
Decree
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
of Code of
According to SeCtion 2(2)
means the formal
Procedure, "decree"
Civil
of an adjudication which, so far
expression
regards the Court expressing it, Decree
as rights of the
conclusively determines the
all or any of the
parties with regard to
mav be
matters in controversy in the suit and
either preliminary
or final.
a
Essential Requirements of Decree
express it in writing.
1) The court must make a formal adjudication and
2
A
decree conclusive determination of ights, typically in ivil or
is a
Judgement
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
According to Section 2(9) of Code of Civil Procedure, "judgment"
means the statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or
a
order. And the "Judge" means the presiding officer of Civil Court. Ina
judgement it is mandatory for judge to provide the ground for passing
either decree or order.
Legal Representative
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
According to Section 2(11) of Code of Civil
Procedure "legal
a
in law represents the estate of
representative" means a perSon whoperson
person, and includes any who intermeddles with the
deceased a party sues or is sued in a
estate of the deceased and where
the person on whom the estate devolves on
representative character way ,
Legal
or In simple
the death of the party so suing
Sued.
representative...
1) Represents deceased person's estate.
estate.
2) Includes those handling the deceased's
3
2) Property obtained through survivorship by a coparcener.
Decree against wrong Legal Representative
A true legal representative will be bound by a decree passed againot
the wronglegal representative if the specified conditions are met.
1) The plaintiff holding the decree acted in
good faith.
2) The obtained decree is genuine, without fraud or collusion.
3) The decree was issued against the person representing the
deceased's estate.
4) The true titleholder didn't intervene during the lawsuit.
Mesne profits
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
According to Section 2(12) of Code of Civil Procedure "mesne
profits" of property means those profits which the person in wrongful
possession of such property actually received or might with ordinary
diligence have received therefrom, together with interest on such
profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the
person in wrongful possession. In simple way main ingredients of
Mesne Profits are
1) Wrongful Possession: Mesne profits apply when a person is in
wrongful possession of a property.
2) Actual or Potential Receipt: Refers to profits that the person in
wrongful possession actually received or could have received with
ordinary diligence.
3)
Exclusion of Improvement Profits: Mesne profits do not include
profits due to improvements mnade by tne person in wronaful
possession.
4) Interest on Profits: Mesne Protits includes interest on thoes
received by the person in wrongful possession.
For Example : Aasim owns house and his sister Rozy wrongfully
a
4
as Mesne Profits. After some time, Rozy builds more
be considered
will
rooms and rent them out to be converted into guest house. The profits
a
5
Topic 2
Jurisdiction of Courts, Principle of Res
subjudice and Res judicata
6
Caondv. the Court Considers whether the statute under scrutiny
nrovides an adequate and satistactory alternative remedv for a
narty aggrieved by an order made under it. other words, if the law
In
affors an alternative mechanism for addressing
grievances that is
offective and sufficient, It may justify the exclusion of civil court
jurisdiction.
COurt, you cannot file a new case on the same subject matter and
with
7
Court.
c)before Suprenme
to arant
court where the first suit is filed must have the authority
5) The
suit.
the relief sought in the later
gives up part of his claim, he can not later sue for that omitted
part.
9
discourage unnecessary multiple lawsuits for the same issue. The
concept relies on having one clear cause of action for the rules to apply.
If causes of action differ between
the initial and subsequent suits, the
restrictions do not apply.
10
Gundaji Satwaji Shinde v. Ram Chandra Bhikaii
Joshi, AIR 1979 SC 653
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
Thenry involved : Section 9 Courts to try all civil suits unless barred)
:
CPC1908
For Judiclal and
Semester Exam
Gundai Satwaj Shinde V. Ram Chandra Bikali Joshi EXam Pressurp
Section 9
Jurisdiction of Civi! Courts
or not
Whether Plaintif isan Agricutturaist
Aasim
LRERYezdani Scan thís QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
this case, the plaintiff initiated legal proceedings, seeking specific
In
performance of a contract for the sale of agricultural land. The
defendant argued that, due to the land falling under the Bombay
plaintiff not being
Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 and the
an agriculturalist, they were not entitled to the specific performance of
the contract.
Issue
1) Is the plaintiff an agriculturalist?
or it
2) Does the civil court have jurisdiction to decide the issue, should
Act to the
refer the matter under section 85-A of the Tenancy
relevant authority (mamlatdar)?
3) Is the jurisdiction of the civil court barred?
11
soecific performance suit and decide the agriculturalist status. agreed
It
with the Trial Court's finding that the plaintiff was not
an agriculturalist.
High
Supreme Court's Decision: Supreme Court disagreed with the
85A of
Court's decision, emphasizing that it overlooked Section
Supreme Court
Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948.
agricultural
held that this section obligates the civil court to refer SUch
under
status issues to the competent authority, namely the Mamlatdar
1948. Supreme
the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
on ground of Section 9 of
Court overruled the High Court's decision,
under
Codeof Civil Procedure, emphasizing the mandatory referral
Section 85A.
Aasim
Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
this case, under Order 37 of CPC, 1908, the plaintiff/appellant
In against the Co
bank filed a summary suit in the Bombay High Court
the Court and
operative Federation. The Federation, appeared before
SOUght a stay on the summary suit. They contended
that they had
on the same subject
already initiated a recovery suit against the Bank
matter before the Summary suit was filed, and this suit
was pending
under
before the Court. So, Summary Suit should not be entertained
Section 10 of CPC, 1908.
12
Contentionof appellant Bank
The appellant Bank argued that applying Section 10 to surmmary
Suits would frustrate the very purpOse of having a separate provision for
such suits.
Issue
Whether the prohibition in Section 10, preventing the trial of
subsequently instituted suits, applies to a "Summary Suit" initiated
?
under Order 37 of the Code
Court Observation & Decision
single Judge of High Court initially ruled that Section 10 the
A of
to regular suits
CPC, which deals with the concept of trial, only applies
As a result, further
and not to summary suits filed under Order 37.
notto be stayed.
proceedings under the Summary Suit need
with this
However, division bench of the High Court disagreed
sSummary suits
decision and held that Section 10 does indeed include
filed under Order 37 of the CPC.
purpose of both Section 10 and
Finally, Supreme Court considered the
a summary suit is not within the
Order 37 of CPC, and concluded that Judge,
scope of Section 10. Therefore, the initial decision of the single
Summary Suit were not
stating that further proceedings under the
Supreme Court.
required to be stayed, was affirmed by the
Note :
Summary suitS are...
upon bills of exchange, hundies and promissory notes.
1) Suits
only to recover a debt
or liquidated
2) Suits in which the plaintiff seeks or without
in in money payable by the defendant with
demand
interest.
13
Iftikhar Ahmed v. Syed Meharban Ali.
AIR 1974SC 749
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Res Judicata)
(Theory Involved :Section 11 Principle of
:
Aasim
TIEUYezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
Ahmed, K. Fatima.,
Inthis case, a previous lawsuit involved Ishtag
property title with a mortgagee. The
and M. Ali as co-plaintiffs, disputing
court decided that only Ishtag Ahmed had title,
excluding the other two.
conclusively settling the
This decision was confirmed by the High Court,
title dispute. Later, a new conflict
arose between (lshtag Ahmed) and
to arbitration.
(K. Fatima & M. Ali) over the same property, leading
14
same.
2) The parties involved must be the
3) Litigation must occur under the same title.
A The court must be competent to handle the subsequent suit.
5) The court should have heard and decisively settled the matter in the
first suit.
Supreme Court confirmed that these conditions are satisfied in the
Dresent case, establishing that the prior court decision conclusively
resolved the matter, impacting the later dispute. So, Doctrine of Res
Judicata would apply.
Aasim
Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
Deputy
Inthis case, a Sub-Inspector, was dismissed by the
Inspector General (DIG) due to corruption charges. Even when the
filed a writ petition in
appeal against this decision failed, Sub-Inspector
dismissal
Allahabad High Court. In the petition, he argued that the
proper chance to
process was unfair and that he was not given a
dismissed his writ
defend against the charges. However, the High Court
petition as well.
of Civil Judge.
Sub-Inspector then filed a new lawsuit in the Court
DIG is not
This timne, he contested the dismissal order, asserting that
to Article 311(1) of the
Competent authority to dismiss him. According
15:
Constitution, only Inspector General (1G) could make such disrrisnal in
Issue
1) Whether constructive res judicata extends to Article 32 or 226
with respect to writ petitions?
2) Can a party in a subsequent suit invoke constructive res judicata
based on not raising a relevant matter in the earlier proceeding?
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court held that Sub-Inspector could have challenged his
dismissal in the previous suit on the ground that he had been
dismissed by an authority subordinate to that by whích he was
appointed, which víolates Article 311(1) of Indian Constitution. But
instead, Sub-Inspector focused on other points, such as not having a
fair chance to defend himself during the
departmental inquiry and
claiming that the dismissal was done with
bad intentions. Consequently.
Supreme Court concluded that, it is not
acceptable for the Sub
Inspector to later challenge the dismissal in a
different lawsuit.
Principle of Constructive Res
Judicata applied here even in wrt
petition.
C.A. Balakrishnan v. Commissioner Corporation of
Madras, AIR 2003 Mad. 170
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
:
(Theory Involved Order 2, Rule 2 Suit to include the whole claim)
:
CPO 1908o03Exan
CA
betddn CamedseCoMade,
V.
For Judicinl and
Somester Exam
Prossure
Gectlon 11
Doctrine of Res Judicate
(Constructive Res Judicata)
sso
Conetvrve Rey udicats pplles on Wat Peddon
Aasim
ULDIEWuYezdani Scan this OR Code for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
In this case, the petitioner's canteen was sealed by a Junior
Engineer. The petitioner initially fled a lawsuit in the city civil court
seeking a mandatory injunction and restoration of possession. Later,
when the High Court resumed after vacations, the petitioner filed a writ
petition and requested the court to issue a writ of mandamus, directing
the respondent (Junior Engineer) to return possession of the premises
to the petitioner. Additionally, the petitioner asked for further orders, for
awarding damages incurred due to the closure of the canteen.
Issue
Whether Order 2, Rule 2 of CPC applies to the Writ Petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court or not ?
Court Observation & Decision
Court held that if someone files a lawsuit to address a particular
issue and is then prevented from filing a second lawsuit to address
different aspects of the same issue, he cannot use a writ petition to
achieve the same result.
a
In simpler way, if a person is not allowed to file second lawsuit due
to legal restrictions, the same restrictions would apply to file
a writ
2,
petition. This decision aligns with the public policy outlined in Order
17
Rule 2. of CPC and is considered a form of constructive res judicata
meaning that the matter is essentially settled by the first legal action
18
Topic 3
Place of Suing
can be
Code of Civil Procedure outlines rules for where suíts
or for institutinga
instituted. Sections 15 to 20 specity the location forurn
Suíts. Sections 21 and 21-A cover objections to the court's
jurisdiction.
19
and
lowest-grade court in the hierarchy,
the
1) Court must be suit.
competent to try the specific
2) The court
must be
the distribution of cases
to balance
In
summary, Section 15 aims courts from being
overly
preventing higher-level
among COurts, to enhance Convenience for the
it aims to testify in the
burdened. Simultaneously, might be required
witnesses who
parties involved and
proceedings.
Jurisdiction
Place of Suing: Territorial
(Sections 16 to 20)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format :Short Notes)
: (16-18)
Suit for Immovable Property Section
to immovable property, such
1) Section 16 specifies that suits related of rights, or
motgage issues, determination
as recovery, partition,
filed in the court where the
compensation for wrongs, should be
a allows filing in
property is situated. However, there is proviso that
is possible.
the defendant's jurisdiction if personal compliance
or compensation concerning
2) Section 17 allows filing a suit for relief any
immovable property in any court within the local limits where
can handle the
part of the property is located, as long as that court
entire claim's value.
Section 18 addresses uncertainty about ijurisdiction. it's unclear
If
3)
which of two or more courts has jurisdiction over the property, any
of them can hear the case after acknowledging the uncertainty.
20
injures B in Calcutta and resides in Delhi, B can sue A in
A
1) If A
either Calcutta
or Delhi.
a Similarly, if defames B in Calcutta and A resides in Delhi Bhee
A
21
a
On the other hand, Section 21A prohibits challenging the validity of
at an
decree based on objections to the place of suing
appellate/revisional stage. This was inserted to prevent filing new suits
toset aside decrees on jurisdictional grounds.
Explanation of Section 21A
1) No suit challenging a decree based on objections to the place of
suing is allowed.
2) "Former suit" refers to a prior decision, regardless of when it was
initiated.
In summary, Sections and 21A aim to streamline the process.
21
22
Topic 4
Garnishee Order
(Order 21 Rules 46-A to 46-1)
Garnishee Order
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format : Short Notes)
Garnishee Order, governed by Rule 46 of Order 21 of the Code of
A
23
Disputed Questions :
Rule 46C deals with disputedanliabiliat
Trial of it as iseu
court may order a trial to determine liability, treating
The
exceeds the court's pecuniary jurisdiction, it transtere
a
suit. the debt
If
Judge.
the case to the District :
Rule 46D deale
Belongs to Third Person
Procedure WVhere Debt may belong to a third person. The
court
with situations where the
debt can set
person to state his claim, and the garnishee
can order the third
claim against the judgment debtor.
off his : Rule 46F establishes
Valid Discharge
Payment by Garnishee to begarnishee, as per notices or orders, to
are
by the and others ordered
that payments made the judgment debtor
valid discharges against decree ororder is set aside.
appear, even if the underlying
a Garnishee Order
Ways of Stopping can prevent a garnishee order
The principal debtor
1) Pay Full Debt: within the specified
time.
full debt
by paying the Arrangements between the debtor and
Repayment: aCceptance is at the
2) Alternative a garnishee order, though
creditor can prevent
creditor's discretion. debtor can pay the
With court approval,
the
3) Pay by
Instalments: order.
instalments, avoiding a garnishee debts
debt in bankruptcy, provable unsecured
Bankruptcy: On declaring garnishee orders cease.
4) and related
become non-payable,
24
Topic 5
Suits by or Against Government
(Sections 79, 80)
OReservedwith Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format :Short Notes)
Sections 79 and 80, of the Civil ProcedureCode, 1908, outlinethe
procedures for lawsuits involving the government or publíc officers
acting officially.
Section 79 of Code of Civil Procedure
1) Purpose: It deals with the procedure for suits brought by or against
the government.
2) Plaintiff/Defendant Authority: In suits against the Central
Government, it should be named as the Union of India. In suits
against a State Government, it should be named as the State.
3) Jurisdiction: Only courts within the local limits where the cause of
action arises have jurisdiction.
4) Cause of Action: This section does not provide a cause of action
but specifies the procedure when it arises.
Section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure
1) Purpose: t Suit Against Notice to be Served on
pertains to the Secretary to
notice Central Government Central Government
requirement Concerned General Manager
Railway
before filing a
Secretary to that State
suit against the Government or the District
State Government
government or a Magistrate
public servant. Public officer Upon such Public Officer
2) Notice Period:
No suit against the government
or public officer can be filed until
cause of
two months after delivering written notice, stating the
action, to the relevant authority.
25
Relief: Urgent relief suits can be filed
Urgent
3) Exceptions for permission, relief is granted only after
but
court
without notice with a
government/public officer chance to present their case.
giving the
court ensures that urgent
relief is necessary
Court's Role: The
4)
if such urgency is not
established
and may return the plaint
#oe
Dismissal: A suit shall not be dismissed
5) Protection against cause of action ar
errors if the plaintiff's details and
notice
substantially indicated.
the government/public servant an
6) Objective: The notice gives
amendments if
opportunity to review their legal position and make
advised.
Important Points
1) Section 80 applies to various types of suits,
including injunctions,
declarations, and damages.
High Court or Supreme
2) It does not apply to writs filed before the
Court.
name, description, place of
3) The notice must include the person's
residence, cause of action, and relief claimed.
In simple way, Sections 79 and 80 of the CPC establish
the procedures
government or public
and notice requirements for lawsuits involving the
an opportunity for resolution before
officers, ensuring fairness and
Iitigation.
26
Topic 6
Appeals
Appeals from Orders and Decrees
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format:Short Notes)
27
Appeal : Section 100 of CPC, 1908
Second Yezdani
OReserved with Aasim
Case lnvolved
v. Pamarti Venka 2009 RLR 27 (N
KoppiSetty Venkat Ratnam
100 of the Civil Procedure Code pertains to Second Anns.
Section
and outlines the following points.
1) Grounds for Second Appeal: An appeal to
the High Court i
allowed from any decree passed in appeal by a lower court if the
High Court believes the case involves substantial question of law
a
28
Constitution : Ap
Article 133
of Appellate jurisdiction
Court in appeals from High Courts in
of Supreme
regard to civil matters
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
Chunilal V. Mehta v. Century Spinning and Manutacturing Co. Ltd
AIR 1962 SC1314
29
Substantial Question of Law
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
Chunilal V. Mehta v. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
AIR1962 SC1314
Koppi Setty Venkat Ratnamv. Pamarti Venka 2009 RLR 27 (NSC)
30
Appellate Court, under the stated conditions, is
this, the powers as original jurisdiction
Apart from with similar duties and
empowered particulary relevant to cases initiated in the
resemblance is
courts. This
cOurts.
lower
107(1)(d) read
additional evidence in Appellate Court)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
RLR 370
Gill& Co. v. BimlaKumari, 1986
rule is that parties
involved in an appeal can not produce
general
of the Civil Procedure
A
31
Chunilal Mehta v. Century Spinning and
V
CPC 1908
Conhal v MahtaV. Contury Bptraing ond
antetorng Ge. Ltd
For Judiclal and
Semoster Exam
Exam Pressure
Firat Appal (Section 98)
Second Appoal (Secton t00)
Aasim
Yezdani
Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
In this case, the appellants were removed as managing agents
before their contract expired, and they filed a lawsuit in the Bombay
High Court seeking Rs. 26 Lacs for damages. The High Court ruled in
favor of the respondent Company. So, appellants wanted to appeal
against this decision before Supreme Court.
For this, they need a "certificate of fitness" from the High Court, as
per Article 133(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. This Article states that
an appeal can go to the Supreme Court from the judgement of a High in
a civil proceeding if the High Court certifies it under Article 134A that
the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance.
But High Court refused to provide "certificate of fitness". So, appellant
moved Supreme Court under Article 136 (SLP).
Issue
Whether High Court was right to refuse to provide Certificate of
fitness
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court laid down certain criteria to determine whether there
is substantial question of law or not.
32
lmportance: The question should be relevant to
General Public
1)
general.
the public in
Direct and
Substantial Impact: It should significantly affect the
2) involved,
rights of the parties
Applying these criteria,
Supreme Court Concluded that the matter of
was not just a simole
interpreting the Managing Agency Agreement not free from doubt.
question. It was complex and The Court
legal High Court, which had made an error
disagreed with thea in not
recognizing it as substantial question of law and denied to grant
"certificate of fitness".
Court furtheradded that the success or failure of the nartioe!
arguments in this case, Concerning
a
substantial sum of money (26
lakhs of rupees),
depended on resolving this complex legal issue about
it was a
the Managing Agency Agreement. Supreme Court believed that
matter of public importance and had a direct impact on the rights of the
parties involved.
> Meaningof Substantial Question of Law in one line :
Any issue
which effects merit of the case or decision of the
court.
v.
Koppi Setty Venkat Ratnam Pamarti Venka
2009 RLR27 (NSC)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
1908 Substantial &
CPC1908
Koppisetty Venat Ratnam V.
For Judicial and
Semester Exam
PuntiVenkayrma, 2009xamPresSUre
Aasim
Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
33
Fact Petition (SLP) in the
filed a Special Leave
In this case, the appellant Court has no jurisdiction to
that the High
Supreme Court, arguing Court under Section
concurrent finding of facts of the lower
dismiss the
Code. Additionally, the appellant contended
100 of the CivilProcedure requirement
failed to comply with the mandatory
that the High Court 100 of the CPC, which
introduced by the amended Section
before
formulation of a "Substantial question of law"
necessitates the
altering such factual conclusions.
Issue
raising a mandatory substantialquestion
Can the High Court, without concurrent findings of
jurisdiction to set aside
of law, have the
subordinate courts under Section 100,
CPC?
& Decision
Supreme Court Observation
that, 1976 amendment to Section 100 of
Supreme Court observed use of second
Procedure Code aimed to curb the excessive
the Civil Commission's 1973 report
Courts. The Law
appeals in High proceedings, limiting second
emphasized the need for finality in legal
questions of law". The amended Section 100
appeals to "Substantial
questions at the appeal's
requires precise formulation of suchwas
admission stage. The legislative intent to prevent second appeals
unnecessary reconsideration of facts. Despite this,
from becoming
concurrent findings without
some High Courts have been setting aside
formulating "Substantial questions of
law", leading to delays. The
emphasizes adherence to the amended Section 100,
Supreme Court
judgments not complying with this requirement and urging
setting aside
expeditious resolution of cases.
High Court can not ignore
Finally, Supreme Court held that the
100 of CPC, 1908.
"Substantial question of law" laid under Section
one line : Any issue
> Meaning of Substantial Question of Law in
which effects merit of the case
or decision of the court.
34
Gill &
Co. v. Bimla Kumari, 1986 RLR
370
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
: Power to Take Additional Evidence:
(Theory Involved Section 107(1)(d)
Rule 27 (Production of additional evidence in read
with Order 41, Appellate Court)]
CPC 1908
GHl and Co. V.Bimla Kumari, 1986
For Judicial and
Semester Exam
Exam Pressure
Order 41 Re 27
Aasim
WJYezdani Scan thís OR Code for
explanaton on YouTube
Fact
this case, a landlady rented out her property to a company and its
In
manager. The landlady then applied for the eviction of the tenants, citing
reasons Such as non-payment of rent and misuse of the premises.
Conseguently, the Additional Rent Controller issued an eviction order.
Duringthe ongoing appeal process, the tenants (appellants)
requested permission under Order 41, Rule 27 to produce additional
evidence-specifically, documents and account books allegedly seized
by the income tax department. The landlady strongly opposed this
request, and the Rent Control tribunal ultimately deniedthe application.
Issue
Whether the Tribunal had proper grounds for dismissing the
appellants' request to produce additional evidence ?
Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court observed that...
on the evidence from the
) Generally, appeals are decided based
lower cOurt, and additional evidence is not allowed.
2) Rule 27 of Order 41 states that parties in
an appeal can not
present additional evidence, whether it is oral or documentary.
to consider
O) However, Rule 27 itself allows the appellate Court
additional evidence in specific situations:
35
a) If the lower court wrongly rejected evidence,
before
b) If the party did not know about this additional evidence
or other
c) If the appellate court finds it necessary for judgment
substantial reasons.
Supreme Court ruled that the lower court rightly refused evidence that
was never presented and was always known to the parties. The key
question was whether the appellate court truly needed the additional
evidence or if there was a valid reason to allow it. Supreme Court
concluded that there was no alid reason, stating that the appellants,
who already possessed the evidence, could not justifty its late
submission by claiming they did not realize its importance until after an
unfavourable trial court decision.
36
Topic 7
Reference
a civil suit, if someone is not satisfied with the outcome,
he
In has
appeal. Reference, Review, and are
options other than a Revision three
legal triangle, providing alternative routes for
remedies forming
resolving disputes.
Reference (Section 113, CPC, 1908)
OReservedwith Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format:Short Notes)
Purpose of Reference
opinions
Section 113 allows subordinate courts to seek High Courterrors
irreversible by
in non-appealable cases, aiming to prevent
on the validity of legislative
obtaining legal clarity in advance, especially
provisions, making the reference mandatory for validity
questions but
optional otherwise.
Essential Conditions for Reference
must be a pending suit or appeal where the decree is not
1) There
appealable.
2) A question of law must arise during the
case.
a reasonable doubt about
3) The court handling the case must have
that question.
37
Review (Section 114, Order 47, CPC, 1908)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
Haridas Das v. Smt. Usha Rani Banik, 2006 (3) SCALE 287
Section 114 of the Code allows a person aggrieved by a court
decree to apply for a review under specific conditions. The review js
meant for reconsideration by the same court and judge, to correct errors
and prevent injustice. This power is an exception tothe generalrule that
once a judgment is pronounced, the court loses control. However
reviews are not appeals, and their scope is strictly confined to to the
scope of Order 47. Not all decrees can be reviewed, and the court
discourages frequent reviews, emphasizing the need for care and
restraint in filing review applications.
Who may apply for Review under Section 114, CPC
A person may seek a review of a court decision if he feels aggrieved :
38
Revision (Section 115, CPC,
1908)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format : Short
Notes)
Section 115 of the Code grants the High
Court
revise certain decisions made by lower courts. the authority to
Revision involves
carefully examining and correcting non-appealable
way for parties to address grievances. This power
orders, providing a
allowSthe High Court
to effectively oversee and correct decisions made by
subordinate
cOurts.
According to Article 115 of CPC,
High Court has the authority to cal
ocords of cases previously decided by lower courts, where no further
appeal is possible.
Reasons for the revision
a) Subordinate court
exceeding its legal authority, making decisions
outside the scope of the law.
b) Subordinate court neglecting to exercise a jurisdiction it legally
possesses.
c) Subordinate court acting illegally or with significant irregularities
while exercising its jurisdiction.
Based on its examination, the High Court may issue orders deemed
appropriate for the specific case, aiming to address any identified
issues or irregularities.
or
It important to note that High Court is prohibited from altering
is
to the High
reversing any decree or order that can be appealed, either
a
COurt itself or to any subordinate court. And revision by the
HighCOurt
legal proceedings,
does not automatically stop or stay the ongoing
a stay for a particular
except when the High Court specifically orders
case or proceeding.
39
Haridas Das v. Smt. Usha Rani Banik, 2006 (3)
SCALE 287
OReservedwith Aasim Yezdani
(Theory Involved : Review (Section 114, Order 47, CPC, 1908)
Fact
In this case, Kalipada sold his land to Haridas, who took possession
and a sale deed was to be executed later. Kalipada started threatening
to Haridas to leave the possession. So, Haridas filed Title Suit No. 1 fo
confirmation of possession, permanent injunction against
dispossession, and specific performance. Kalipada, during proceedings.
sold the said land to Usha Rani. Again Haridas filed Title Suit No, 2 to
cancel the sale deed, alleging it was illegal and fraudulent.
Decision of Lower Courts
Haridas initially succeeded in Title Suit No. 2, resulting in the
cancellation of a sale deed. However, the District Judge (First Appellate
Court), on appeal by Kalipada, set aside this decree. Haridas then filed
a Second Appeal in High Court, which the High Court allowed, and
restored the original decree. Subsequently, Kalipada filed a review
application, asserting the presence of a mistake or error apparent on
the face of the record. The High Court, agreeing with the need for
review, modified its earlier judgment, leading to the dismissal of the
Second Appeal. High Court held that Title Suit No. 1, concerning
specific performance of a land sale agreement, lacked the necessary
leavelpermission under Order 2, Rule 2, CPC. Consequently, High
Court affirmed the decision of the First Appellate Court (District Judge).
Haridas, feeling aggrieved, challenged the High Court's order in an
application for review. He contended that High Court overlooked the
Scope and ambit of Order 47, Rule 1, CPC, asserting that the
necessary parameters for the application of this provision are not
present in the current case.
Issue
Whether the review conducted by the High Court on the Order trom
theSecond Appealwas justified?
40
Observation
Supreme Court
The Supreme emphasizes that review proceedings are
Court
not a
but are limited to specific grounds
means of appeal under Order 47,
Rule 1. The
Court distinguishes the power of review from
th
appellate
that review is not for correcting errors on
power, stating merit. An error
must be apparent on the face of the record
justitying review and not
power
require lengthy reasoning. The
of is
review not to be confused
with an appellate
power that corrects all errors. The judgment may
a
be
there is mistake or an error apparent on
open to review if the face of
not if it
requires a
complex process of reasoning.
the record, but
Supreme Court Decision
Applying these principles to the case, the Supreme Court finds that
the High Court made errors in accepting a review. The crucial question
t considered was irrelevant to one of the suits. The High Court also
mistakenly concluded that no prayer for leave under Order 2, Rule 2,
CPC was made, whereas the right to institute the suit was reserved in
the plaint. The Supreme Court holds the High Court's order as contrary
to the law and sets it aside, restoring the judgment and order passed in
the Second Appeal.
41
Topic 8
Inherent Powers of Court (Section 151)
Section 151 : Saving of lInherent Powers of Court
Case Involved
Mahant RamDass v. Mahant Ganga Dass, AlR 1961 S.C. 882
42
Code. The section
powers conferred by the does not create
any other powers but acknowledges the court's discretionary
new substantive rendering justice.
power
necessary for
Power
Scope of Inherent
are not exhaustive because
The provisions in the CPC the
can not foresee all future circumstances in litigation. Inherent
legislature powers
powers are
complementary to the specifically granted by the
court Can use these powers at
relevant stages to serve the
Code. The
or prevent abuse of the court's process. This flexibility
ends of justice
court to address unforeseen situations not cOvered by explicit
allows the
provisions in the Code.
CPC 1908
Mahant Rem Das V. Mahant Gengs Das, 1961
For Judiciai and
Senester Exam
Exam Pressure
Section 151
Aasim
RRYezdani Scan this QRCode for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
on time due to
In this case, the appellant failed to pay court fees
financial constraints and the court being closed for vacation. Upon
or 149 of
reopening, he sOught extension of time under Section 148
CPCdue to serious illness and unsuccessful attempts to secure loan
a
due to a sudden slump in the grain market. However, the High Court
if
rejected it, invoking the earlier order i.e. appeal would be allowed only
tne court fee was paid on time. Court held that Sections 148 and 149
43
fo.
apply pre-final order and also denied extension under Section 151
similar reasons.
Issue
Whether the High Court was unable to extend the time in the aiven
circumstances or could used its inherent power?
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court observed that while procedural orders are important
for maintaining order, they do not entirely prevent the court from
considering unforeseen events. Sections 148 and 149 of CPC allow
the court to extend time even after the original period has expired. And
Section 151 of CPC grants inherent powers to the court, and the High
Court could have used these powers. But, High Court made an error by
not considering an application for time extension filed before the
deadline. Supreme Court corrected this, emphasizing the importance of
courts using their powers to ensure justice, even in unique situations.
The appeal was reinstated, and the appellant was granted additional
time to pay the cOurt fee.
44
Topic 9
Parties to Suits
Joinder, Misjoinder and Non Joinder of
Meaning of
Parties
Code of Civil
proceedings governed by the
Procedure,
In legal misjoinder, and non-joinder of parties
principles of joinder,
1908, the
shaping the course of litigation. These concepts
pivotal role in
play a ensure a just and comprehensive resolution of
fundamental to Parties to Suit
are 1 to 13 of CPC, 1908 talks about
Rule
disputes. Order 1, non-joinder.
as joinder, misjoinder, and
Joinder of Parties
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Notes)
(Question Format: Short
legal process of including all
to the a
Joinder of parties refers lt ensures that everyone who has
necessary parties in a lawsuit. legal proceedings. In Simple
matter is part of the
direct interest in the of relevant parties for a fair legal
inclusion
way, joinder ensures the
process,
says Several persons can join a
CPC, 1908 on the
Order 1, Rule of have a shared right to relief based would
1
if they
lawsuit as plaintiffs events. Additionally, if separate suits one
same incident or related they can be joined in
common legal or factual questions,
Involve
suit for efficiency. 1908 says several
CPC,
Order 1. Rule 3 of if the claims
against
On the other hand a lawsuit
persons can be joined
as defendants in events. This includes
same incident or related against them, and if
them arise from the a shared riright to relief questions would
situations'where there is legal
or factual
Common
separate suits were filed,
emerge.
45
Misjoinder and Non Joinder of Parties
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format :Short Notos)
1) Misjoinder of Partios: Misjoinder occur6 when there is an
improper or incorrect joiningof partios in a lawsuit. It
someone is includod as a party incorrectly or
happens vihen
unnecessarily.
2) Non-Jolnder of Partlos: Non-jolnder happens when a necessary
party, someong crucial for a complete
and fair decisíon, is not
included in the logalprocoodings.
Simple way, misjoinder is the improper inclusion
In
of parties, and
non-joinder is the failure to include necessary
parties, all regulated by
to
the CPC maintain the integrity of legal
proceedings.
Order 1, Rulo 9 of CPC, 1908
addresses the consequences of
misjoindcr and non-joinder of parties in a
lawsuit while Order 1, Rule
13 of CPC, 1908 1alks about
objections as to non-joinder or misjoinder.
46
Topic 10
Amendment of Pleadings
Amendment of Pleadings
(Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC, 1908)
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
li Jai Ram Manghar Lal v. National Building Material Supply Co. AIR
1969 S.C. 1267
Mis Ganesh Trading Co. V. Moji Ram, AIR 1978 SC 484
107
Dalip Kaur Major Singh, AIR 1996 P &H
v.
47
faith.
must be requested in good must meet
3) Good Faith: Amendments amendments
Proposed
4) Compliance with Time Limits:
court deadlines.
Granting Amendment of Pleadings certain
for Considers
EssentialConditions of pleadings,
Court
While granting amendmentmentioned hereinafter. harm
conditions which are not unfairly
essential Amendment should
Other Party:
1) No Injustice to
Proposed
the opposing party. Controversy:
Determining Real dispute.
2) Necessary for to resolve the actual
essential circumstances
amendment must be specific
to amend pleadings occurs under are unnecessary
Refusal if they
may reject amendment of pleadings or violate rights of other
Courts new case or seem unfair excessive delayor
a whole
or introduce unnecessary complications or involve or if
a malicious intent
party or create case significantly or have
alter the nature
of
chances for changes.
parties missed earlier
v. National Building
Manohar Lal
Jai Jai Ram Co.,AlR 1969 S.C. 1267
Material Supply
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani 1908))
of Pleadings (Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC,
[Theory :Involved Amendment
For Judicial and
CPC1908 Semester Exam
Order 6, Rule 17
Amendment of Pleadings
Aasim
OLTMmu Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
48
Fact
In this case, Manohar Lal, son of Jai Jai Ram, filed a lawsuit against
National Building Material Supply to recover money for timber supplied.
The action was initiated in the name of "Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal." the
name under which the business operated. The defendant argued that
the plaintiff is an unregistered firm and therefore not competent to sUe.
So, plaintiff requested permission to amend the complaint, seeking to
identify himself in the case title as "Manohar Lal, proprictor of Jai Jai
Ram Manohar Lal."
Issue
Whether plaintiff should be given a chance to amend his complaint
under these circumstances ?
Lower Court Decision
The Subordinate Court granted leave for this amendment. However,
the High Court contended that the action was initiated in the name of a
non-existing person, and the subordinate judge lacked competence to
grant the amendment.
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court held that a party should not be denied rightful relief
due to mistakes, negligence, or procedural errors. The court asserted
that it typically allows amendments to pleadings unless there is
evidence of malicious intent or if the mistake has caused irreparable
harm to the opposing party. In the present case, Supreme Court found
no malafide intent or irreversible harm caused by the plaintiff's error.
Therefore, the Supreme Court allowed the amendment to the lawsuit
title, emphasizing the principle that parties should not be deprived of
justice based solely on procedural lapses.
49
M/s Ganesh Trading Co. v. MojiRam,
AIR 1978 SC 484
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
[Theory : Involved Amendment of Pleadings (Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC, 1908)1
CPC 1908
MIS Ganesh Trading Go, V. Mojl Ram, 1978
For Judicial and
Semester Exam
Exäm Pressure
Order 6, Rule 17
Amendment of Pleadings
Aasim
LYezdani Scan this OR Code for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
a
In this case, Ganesh Trading appellant plaintiff firm, filed
Co., the
in a promissory note. The
lawsuit to recover a sum of money specified
on, appellant plaintiff
suit was initiated through one of its partners. Later
a crucial detail that the
realized that they had unintentionally omitted
firm had actually been dissolved before filing the lawsuit.
So, appellant
necessary
plaintiff sought Court to amend their pleading by adding this
detail in their plaint.
Lower Court Decision
application,
Both the Trial Court and the High Court rejected the
new cause of action that was already
arguing that it would introduce a
time-barred.
Issue
to amend the
Whether the appellant plaintiff should be allowed
firm.
plaint, given the oversight in mentioning the dissolution of the
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Petition
Supreme Court, hearing the case through Special Leave
obstruct
(SLP), emphasized that procedural laws should aid rather than
the path of substantive justice. Court observed that the proposed
amendment would not change the cause of action.it merely rectified the
failure to mention the firm's dissolution. This correction accurately
50
reflected the plaintiff's capacity at the time of filing the suit. Importantly,
it would not alter the identity of the plaintiff. Consequently. Supreme
Court allowed the appeal for the amendment, recognizing its
compatibility with the pursuit of justice.
Exam Pressure
Order G. Rule 17
Aasim
EAHKülDYezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
Inthis case, the plaintiff filed an application under Order 6, Rule
17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking amendment of the
Civil
plaint by making a prayer for declaring the judgment and decree
Suit entitled Major Singh V. Balbir Kaur' as null and
void and ineffective against the rights of the plaintiff. The application of
amendment was dismissed by the trial court on tWO grounds namely.
1) Application for amendment has been filed without explaining the
alleged excessive delay.
2) the amendment is likely to change the foundation of suit.
Issue
?
Whether the plaintiff should be allowed to amend the plaint
High Court Observation & Decision
High Court held thatOrder 6, Rule 17 of CPC, 1908 allows parties
to amend their pleadings for justice. This power is broad and applicable
at any stage. However, amendment in pleadings is not an absolute right
51
allowel
depends on circumstances. Finally High Court
and it plaintiff is not time barrer
amendment by saying the relief claimed by
no vested right of the respondent
and by the proposed amendment
laid down certain principle
would be hampered. Along with it, High Court
of pleading.
while dealing with application of amendment
are necessary for
1) All amendnments should be allowed which
suit.
determination of the real controversies in the
2) Proposed anmendments should
not cause prejudice to the other side
means of costs.
which cannot be compensated by
3) Amendment of a claim or relief barred
by time should not be
allowed.
to or results in
4) No amendment should be allowed which amounts
on account of lapse of
defeating a legal right to the opposite party
time.
technicalities of law and
5) No party should suffer on account of the
to minimise the litigation
the amendment should be allowed
between the parties.
on
or which if not fraudulent should not be made
6) Error mistake
ground for rejecting the application for
amendments of pleadings.
Aasim
Yezdani Scan this QA Code for
explanation on YouTube
52
Fact
a
this case, the suit was initially filed in the lower court seeking
In
53
Topic 11
Rejection of Plaint
Rejection of Plaint (Order 7, Rule 11 of CPC, 1908)
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
v.
Saleem Bhai State of Maharashtra, AIR 2003 SC 759
A "Plaint" is a written document expressing the grievances of
someone who wants to file a lawsuit in a civil court. It outlines the facts
supporting his case and the relief he seeks. The purpose is to inform
the court and the defendant about the plaintiff's claims and helps to
clarifty the issues and preventing surprises during
legal proceedings.
Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 specifies Plaint Rejected
conditions under which a plaint
shall be rejected. It says that the Order 7., Rule 11
plaint shall be rejected in the
following cases:-
a) Where it does not disclose a
cause of action.
b) Where the relief claimed is
undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being
required by the Court to correct
the valuation within a time to be
fixed by the Court,fails to so.
do
c) Where the relief claimed
is properly valued but the plaint
upon paper insufficiently is written
stamped, and the plaintiff, on
required by the Court to supply being
time to be fixed by the requisite stamp-paper within a
the Court, fails to do so.
d) Where thesuit appears
from the statement in
by any law. the plaint to be barred
e) Where it is not filed in
duplicate.
f) Where the plaintiff fails
to comply sub-rule
(2) of rule 9.
There is a proviso
stating that the Court may
correcting the valuation extend the time to
or Supplying
the requisite stamp-paper only n
54
is convinced, with recordedreasons, that the plaintiff was prevented by
an exceptional circumstance from doing sO within the initially fixed time
and that refusing an extension would cause grave injustice to the
plaintiff.
Fact
In this case, the plaintiff filed a suit, and the defendant (appellant)
sought its dismissal under Order 7, Rule 11 of CPC, 1908 citing
grounds under clauses (a) and (d). The defendant (appellant) also
applied under Section 151 of CPC, 1908 for the court to decide the
Order 7, Rule 11 application first. The trial Court dismissed some
applications but directed the defendant (appellant) to file a written
statement. The defendant appealed to the High Cout, claiming the suit
should be rejected under Order 7, Rule 11, citing lack of cause of
action and suit appears to be barred by any law i.e. principles of res
judicata and lis pendens.
Issue
Whether an application under Order 7, Rule 11 should consider the
plaint's allegations, making the defendant's written statement irrelevant.
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
on plaint
Supreme Court held that Order 7, Rule 11 focuses
averments, and the trial court can act at any stage before concluding
are
the trial. Supreme Court emphasized that written statements
a
irrelevant for deciding Order 7, Rule 11 applications and directing
written statement before deciding the Order 7, Rule 11 application is
a
55
procedural error, indicating non-exercise of jurisdiction by the trial court
which was later confirmed by High Court.
Finally, Supreme Court set aside the common order and remitted the
case to the trial court by directing the trial court to decide the Order 7.
Rule 11 application based on the plaint's averments after giving both
parties a fair hearing. The appeal was allowed accordingly.
56
Topic 12
Appearance of Parties and
Consequences of Non-appearance
Appearance of Parties and Consequences of Non
appearance (Order 9, Rules 6, 7 and 13)
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal, AIR 1955 SC 425
Rajni Kumar v. Suresh Kumar Malhotra, 2003 (3) SCALE 434
Bhanu Kumar Jain v. ArchanaKumar, AIR 2005 SC 626
The Code of Civil Procedure is built on the fundamental principle
that Court proceedings should avoid causing harm to any party by
proceeding in their absence whenever possible. Within this framework,
Order 9 of CPC, 1908 specifically addresses the matter of parties
appearing in court and outlines the consequences of their non
appearance.
Order 9, Rule 6 says if the plaintiff appears in court but the defendant is
absent, three scenarios arise:
1) Ifthe summons was properly served, the court may proceed with an
ex parte hearing.
2) If the summons was not proven to be duly served, the court shall
issue new summons.
3) If the summons was served but not in sufficient time to enable him
to appear, the Court shall reschedule the hearing by notiftying the
defendant.
If
it is the fault of plaintiff for improper summon or timing, he shall be
ordered to pay the costs of the postponement.
Order 9, Rule 7 says that if the Court has previously postponed a case
ex parte because the defendant did not appear before Court, and later
the defendant appears on the rescheduled day and provides a valid
reason for not appearing earlier, the Court may allow the defendant to
present his side of the case.
57
In simple way. if
the defendant had a good reason for missing theinitial
court date, and he appears on the new date, the Court might let him to
participate in the case, but the Court can decide on certain conditione
like requiring the defendant to pay some Costs
Essentially, it gives the defendant a chance to be heard.
other terms r
Order 9, Rule 13 sas that if the Court has given ex parte decision
against the defendant, the defendant can ask the same court to cancel
that decision. To do this, the defendant needs to prove either summon
was not duly served to him or he had a valid reaSon for not
appearing in
Court. If the Court is convinced, it shall cancel the ex parte decision and
set a new date for the case.
Itis important to note that a court shall not cancel ex parte decision just
because the summon was not duly served to defendant. If the
defendant knew about the court date and had enough time to respond.
the court shall not cancel the decision based on a service irregularity.
Also, there was an appeal against the ex parte decision and it was
if
resolved for reasons other than the appellant withdrawing the appeal,
this rule shall not be used to cancel the decision.
v. Election Tribunal,
Sangram Singh
AIR1955 SC 425
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
[(Theory Involved:Appearance of Parties and Consequences
of
Aasim
Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
58
Fact
Inthis case, the defendant and his lawyer missed the Election
Tribunal hearings, so the Tribunal allowed the case to proceed ex parte
(one-sided). The plainti's witnesses were examined in three hearings
in absence of the defendant and his counsel. On the fourth hearing, the
defendant and his counsel appeared before Tribunal and asked to
reverse the ex parte decision and requested the Tribunal to cross
examine the witnesses who were examined without them. But the
tribunal refused.
The defendant then filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court,
which was also rejected. So, defendant appealed before Supreme
Court.
Issue
Whether "ex-parte proceedings" mean the defendant is completely
barred from future court appearances ?
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
The Supreme Court emphasized several important points:
1) Ex parte proceedings do not mean the defendant is completely
barred from participating in future stages of the lawsuit.
2) If a party misses a hearing but appears on the day to which the
hearing is adjourned, he cannot be denied participation simply
because he did not attend an earlier hearing.
3) Procedural laws, rooted in the principle of natural justice, prioritize
the right to be heard (locus standairule).
4) The procedural code serves as a legal framework designed to
streamline the process and enhance the administration of justice.
Finally, Supreme Court held that the Tribunal was wrong to deny the
appellant's counsel participation when he appeared. Supreme Court
accepted the counsel's valid reasons for missing specific dates and
allowed him to participate in further proceedings, setting aside the
tribunal's order under Order lX Rule 13 of the CPC, 1908.
59
Rajni Kumar v. Suresh Kumar Malhotra,
2003 (3) SCALE 434
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
[(Theory Involved:Appearance of Parties and Consequences of Non
appearance (Order 9, Rules 6, 7 and 13))
Fact
Inthis case, the tenant/appelant rented a flat from the
landlord/plaintiff for nine months. After the lease term ended, the tenant
continued to occupy the premises. The landlord filed a Summary Suit
under Order 37 of CPC, 1908 for unpaid electricity/water charges. The
tenant was summoned but did not appear, leading to an ex parte
decree. The tenant then applied under Order 37, Rule 4 of CPC, 1908
to set aside the decree, but the application was dismissed. The tenant
appealed, arguing non-service of summons and disputing the
applicability of Order 37 of CPC, 1908. But High Court dismissed the
appeal. So, tenant appealed before Supreme Court.
Issue
1) Whether the High Court committed an error in refusing to set aside
the ex parte decree, considering the tenant's application under
Order 37, Rule 4, lacked sufficient facts tor a defence ?
2) How does Order 37, Rule 4 differ from Order 9, Rule 13 of CPC,
1908?
Supreme Court Observation
Supreme Court emphasised that...
1) Order 37, Rule 4 empowers the Court to set aside an ex parte
decree under special circumstances.
2) 'Special circumstances' is not precisely defined but implies
Something exceptionalor uncommon.
3) Non-service of summons qualifies as a special circumstance.
4) The distinction between suits filed under Order 37 and suits in the
ordinary manner is crucial.
60
Rule specifically addresses setting aside
4 a decree,
Order 37,
5) Rule 13 inapplicable in Summary Suit.
making Order 9,
Decision
Supreme Court
Supreme Court held that High Court rightly acknowledged special
circumstances for the tenant's non-appearance but relief was denied
absence of a specified defence since the tenant did not
due to the
sufficient details to support a defence in the application under
provide
Order 37, RuleSupreme Court found no jurisdictional error or
4.
Fact
Inthis case, the owner of a property passed away, leaving his Son
(original plaintiff), wife (original defendant 1), and daughter (original
defendarnt 2). Governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu law, the
son
filed a partition suit in 1976. Amidst legal proceedings, the daughter's
husband (Respondent 2) claimed a mortgage, alleging itwas created by
his deceased mother-in-law (original defendant 1). Original defendant
1's death led to the daughter becoming defendant 1, and her husband,
Respondent 2, becoming defendant 2. During the suit, defendants failed
to present documents, and on a day set for evidence, they were absent,
resulting in an ex parte order against defendant 1.
Issue
an
1) Whether the First Appeal was valid despite the dismissal of
application under Order 9, Rule 13.
61
an ex pDarte
2) What remedies are available to a defendant after
decree under Order 9, Rule 13, and the extent of such remedies
Supremne Court Observation
Supreme Court emphasised that...
1) An appeal against an ex parte decree is valid
if materials in the v
parte proceedings do not support decree or the suit should pot
a if
62
Topic 13
Summary Procedure
Summary Procedure (Order 37, Rule 1 to 4)
CReserved with Aasim Yezdani
Case Involved
Santosh Kumar v. Bhai Mool Singh, AIR 1958 S.C. 321
Ms Mechalec Engineers and Manufacturers v. Basic Equipment
Corporation, AIR 1977 SC 577
ONGC Ltd. v. State Bank of India, AIR 2000 SC 2548
Summary Procedure
Aasim
Yezdani
Scan this OR Code for
erpianation on YouTute
Order 37 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is related with
Summary Procedure. A summary procedure is a suit in which the
defendant is not allowed to defend himself as a matter of right. In such
suits, defendant has to obtain leave to defend his suit from the Court
within limitation period.
63
Aspect Ordinary suit Summary suit
Defendant's Right toEntitled as a matter of|Not entitled except
defend right with Court's leave
Setting Aside Decree Only on review by the|Trial Court may set it
trial Court aside under special
circumstances
Types of suits covered Allkinds of suits |Simple suits like
promissory notes,
|hundies, bill of
exchange
|Commencement period|Must be brought within Must be brought
3 years within one year from
the date debt become
due and payable
Duration of disposal Takes longer time Disposed of quickly
64
Santosh Kumarv. Bhai Mool Singh.
AIR 1958 S.C. 321
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Theory lnvolved : Surmmary Procedure (Order 37, Rule 1
to 4)
Summary Procedurn
37
Leave to defend the Sutt tmder Order
Aasim
Yezdani
Scan lhis QR Codo for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
Inthis case, the plaintiff (respondent) initiated legal proceedings
under Order 37 of CPC, 1908 based on a Rs. 60,000 cheque issued by
the defendants (appellant), which was dishonoured upon presentation
to the bank. The defendant applied under Rule 3 of Order 37, seeking
permission to defend the suit. The defendant asserted that the cheque
was provided solely as collateral for goods, contending that the goods
were already paid for through cash and other cheques. Therefore, the
cheque had fulfilled its purpose and lacked consideration.
The Trial Court acknowledged that the defendant raised a legitimate
issue for trial but deemed it ambiguous and not bona fide due to the
absence of evidence. The trial court granted leave for the defendant to
defend the suit under the condition of furnishing security for the suit
amount and associated costs. So, defendant appealed against the
imposition of condition.
Issue
1) Whether the Trial Court was correct in imposing the condition to
provide security for suit amount and cost of suit, citing the defence's
lack of clarity andgenuineness, and
2) Whether Order 37 grants limitless discretion in this regard?
65
& Decision
Supreme Court Observation 1908 does not grant
Order 37 of CPC,
Supreme Court held that the It requires the Court
to exercise
Court.
limitless discretion to the in consonance with the principles
lines and Court can
discretion along with judicial further added that the
of natural justice.
Supreme Court defendant is
is reason to believe that the
impose conditions only there present case, the defendant's defense
if
litigation. In
trying to prolong the Court should have granted leave
the
raised a triable issue, and was not correct in imposing the condition to
unconditionally. Trial Court
suit amount and cost of the suit. The imposition
provide security for the appellant was entitled to
was deemed illegal, and the
of the condition
security. The appeal was allowed on
providing
defend the suit without
this ground.
Manufacturers v.
M/s Mechalec Engineers and
Corporation, AIR 1977 SC 577
Basic Equipment
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani 1 to 4)]
(Order 37, Rule
(Theory Involved:Summary Procedure
For Judicial and
CPC1908
MS Mde EngieorV. Bs Equiport
Corporation, 1977
Semester Exam
Exarm PreSSure
Order 37 (Rude 1 to4]
Surnmary Procedure
Supreme Court Guideline
Aasim
LERtipYezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on You Tube
Fact
this case, a
partnership firm (plaintiff), initiated a legal action
In on a dishonoured
seeking the recovery of a specific amount based
sult
cheque issued by the defendant (appellant). The plaintiff filed the
under Order 37 of CPC, 1908, which requires the defendant to seeh
66
permission to defend. The trial court granted unconditional leave to
defend.
Howeve, the High Court later determined that the defendant's
defence was not genuine (bonafide) and overruled the Trial court's
decision to grant unconditional leave. Instead, the High Court imoosed
certain conditions on the defendant to defend himself.
Issue
Whether the High Court rightly imposed the condition on defendant
to defend himself?
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court emphasized principle laid down by Calcutta High
Court related with Order 37 of CPC, 1908 in Smt. Kiranmoyee Dassi
v. Dr. Chatterjee case, which is mentioned hereinafter...
67
v.
State Bank of India, AIR2000 SC 2548
ONGCLtd.
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani 1 to 4)|
(Order 37, Rule
((Theory Involved:Summary Procedure
Fact
into a contract with Saipem,
In this case, ONGC (appellant) entered pipelines, with a
Italy (contractor) for the construction of undersea
period. The contract included provisions for
specified completion to meet deadlines, and a
liquidated damages the if contractor failed
cover these damages. The respondent,
bank guarantee was required to
an unconditional bank guarantee.
State Bank of India (SBI), issued
After a delay of more than 300 days,
ONGC assessed liquidated
requested the contractor to extend the bank guarantee.
damages and
which the contractor failed to do. ONGC then asked
SBI to credit the
reasons, refused. So, ONGC filed a
guarantee, but SBI, citing various
its enforcement.
Summary Suit under Order 37 of CPC, 1908 for
to procure
Through various legal procedures, SBI Succeeded
unconditional leave to defend by High Court. So, ONGC appealed
before Supreme Court.
Issue
Whether the High Court was justified in granting unconditional leave
to defend to SBI.
Supreme Court Observation & Decision
Supreme Court found that the defense raised by SBI
was baseless,
and there was no valid reason for granting unconditional leave
t0
defend. The court rejected the High Court's order, stating that the only
basis for SBl's defense was an injunction obtained in their favour from
the Italian Court, which had no relevance to the bank guarantee. Ihe
court vacated the order and dismissed SBI's application for leave to
defend, allowing ONGC's appeal.
Finally, Supreme Court held that, unless fraud is proven, an
unconditional bank guarantee should be honoured, and SBl's dererioo
lacked merit. The order of granting unconditional leave to defend
w
68
Topic 14
Temporary Injunctions and Interlocutory
Orders
Injunctionand Types of Injunction
GReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Ouestion Format:Short Notes)
Temporary Injunetion
Injunction and Types of Injunctior
Aasim
Yezdani Scan thís OR Code for
explanation on YouTube
An injunction is a Court order telling someone to do or stop doing
something to prevent future harm. Ad interim injunction temporarily
maintains the current situation until the case isfully resolved, and it can
be requested by both the person filing the lawsuit (plaintiff) and the
person being sued (defendant).
Types of lnjunctions
Inlegal terms,there are two types of injunctions:
1) Permanent Injunction
2) Temporary Injunction
A Permanent Injunction granted after a trial concludes,
is
restraining a party forever from a specified act (regulated by the
or
Specific Relief Act, 1963). On the other hand, a Temporary Interim
Injunction is granted until the suit is decided or the court issues further
1908).
orders (regulated by Order 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
On ground of nature, there are two types of Injunctions.
1) Preventive Injunction
69
2) Mandatory Injunction
to prevent, forbid, or restrict someone
A Preventive Injunction aims
from doing something. On the other hand, a
Mandatory lnjunction
forces, directs, or orders someone to do something.
70
The iniury faced by the plaintiff shouid be irreparable and unable to
means.
be adequately compensated through monetary
a Ralance of convenience lies in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendant;
4) The plaintiff is acting fairly and honestly.
is important to note that Section 94 (C) of CPC, 1908 says that. for
IH
the sake of justice the court can grant a Temporary Injunction to stop
cerain actions, and if the defendant disobeys, he may be imprisoned,
and his property may be attached and sold.
Interlocutory Orders
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format : Short Notes)
"interlocutory Orders" are legal decisions made during ongoing
a
court proceedings, aiming to address specific issues without providing
of
final judgment. These orders, covered by Rules 6 to 10 of Order 39
CPC, 1908 primarily focus on Court's power to issue Interlocutory
It is important to
Orders for protecting the subject-matter of the suit.
note that Interlocutory Orders do not provide a final decision but
addresS necessary matters related to the case
1) Rule 6 enables the court to order the interim sale of movable
on
property, especially if it is perishable or subject to decay, based
an application from a party involved.
71
by paying the outstanding
amount, with the court
defaulter to reimburse the amount decreeing the
paid.
5) Rule 10 deals with depositing money
in court when the subject
matter is money or something
deliverable, and a party admits
holding it as a trustee or on
behalf of another party. The court.
considering the circumstances, may
order the deposit of money or
delivery of the item.
These rules empower the court to make necessary
ongoing legal proceedings, ensuring fair treatment orders during
and the protection of
assets involved in the case.
Aasim
Yezdani
Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact & issue
In this case, during hearing,
the key question arose that whether the
Court can use its inherent powers
(Section 151 of CPC, 1908) to grant
injunctions, despite the presence of specific
provisions (Section 94 and
Order 39 of CPC, 1908) exclusively addressing
injunctions during legal
proceedings. The central issue is whether
the Court can employ 1s
inherent power in addition to the explicitly
stated statutory provisions.
Supreme Court Observation &
Decision
The apex court made
several key observations:
72
The Court highlighted that the provisions of the code are not
)
exhaustive, indicating that the legal framework extends beyond
what is explicitly stated.
no
party has the absolute right to insist on
2) It
emphasized that the
Coud's intervention; the Court exercises its authority when deemed
necessary for the sake of justice.
a The Court noted that there is no specific prohibition in Section 94
of CPC,
1908 against issuing temporary injunctions in
circumstances not covered by Order 39 of CPC. 1908
4)
Section 151 of CPC, 1908, according to the court, does not restrict
or limit the inherent power of the Court.
Dalpat Kaur v.
Prahlad Singh, AlR1993 SC276
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
[(Theory lnvolved Temporary Injunction (Order 39 of CPC, 1908)]
:
-; Temporary Injunction
FARLIANENSOIn
Aasim
INASEEI Yezdani Scan this QR Code for
explanation on YouTube
Fact
In this case, the legal proceedings unfolded in four rounds:
73
1) Firstly, the appellant entered into an agreement with the respondent
to buy a house, paid the money, but didn't receive possession
Subsequently, the appellant filed a suit for specific performance
and the court decreed it ex-parte, executing a sale deed.
a suit against the
2) Secondly, the respondent's wife then initiated
taking
appellant, seeking a ternporary injunction to prevent him from
possession. The Trial Court rejected this request. and the
Hich
74
On ground above principles, Supreme Court held that the High Court
of
error by granting an injunction without sufficient
made a legal evidence
or a strong
irreparable harm prima facie Case.
of
75
Topic 15
Miscellaneous
Section 89 of Code of
civil procedure, 1908 talks
about Settlement of Dispute
Outside the Court. If Court
thinks that parties can settle their dispute through mutual agreement
without going under complex and time consuming judicial process, then
Court may refer the dispute to
a) Arbitration or
b) Conciliation or
c) Judicial Settlement including Settlerment through Lok Adalat or
d) Mediation.
Explanation
a) Arbitration :
is a dispute resolution where parties choose neutral
It
tor
individuals to fairly settle their issues Outside court. It aims
impartial decisions, minimizes delays and costs. Parties can decide
the arbitration details but need a prior agreement.
b) Conciliation: lt is a friendly settlement process where pave
a agreement, seek resolution with the help of d
without prior
impartial third person based on their willingnes.
dispute
c)
Mediation : A
mediator is involved in assisting the
partiesin
themselves
to reach an amicable solution.. The parties in dispute
not impose
set the conditions of the settlement. The mediator does faciltator
as a
acts
his own decisions on the parties but merely
involved in
improving the coriTunication betneen the
are generally refer paies
Matrimonial disputes to mediaton.
Lok Adalat
: Lok Adalats, set up by the Legal Serices Authortes
d
Act 1987, aim
to quickty settie disputes betore going to oour They
help to resolve disputes amicably in the eariy stages of a
disagreement. No one can appeal against Judgemert grven by Lok
Adalat in any
Court inciuding Supreme Court of India
Precept
GReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Ouestion Format : Short Notes)
Precept is generally an order given by the Court that
A
asissueda
decree to another competent Court, instructing it to attach any properny
oHned by the judgment-debtor.
77
improving the communication between the parties.
involved in are generally refer to mediation.
Matrimonial disputes
Precept
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format : Short Notes)
generally
is an order given by the Court that has issued a
A
Precept
it to attach any property
decree to another competent Court, instructing
owned by the judgment-debtor.
Code, 1908 empowers a court to
Section 46 of the Civil Procedure
issue a precept to another court
competent to execute a decree,
directing the attachment of specified
property of the judgment-debtor
purpose is to prevent the
within the jurisdiction of that court. The
judgment debtor from disposing of the
property until proper proceedings
for the sale of the property can take place.
to the court receiving it.
Tne precept does not transfer the decree
Instead, it serves to keep the judgment
debtor's property in check
two months, extendatble
lemporarily. The attachment remains valid for
Dy the court issuing the precept.
or until the decree is transferred for
prevents the judgment
execution tothe court receiving the precept. This
to the detriment of the decree
deotor from dealing with the property
holder.
are needed. Firstly, an
hiier attachment through a precept. further steps
to transmit the
CPplcation under Section 39 of the Code is required
to the Court responsible for execution. Subsequentiy,
an
deee
application for made to the receiving
execution of the decree must be
S process ensures that the necessary legal actions are taken
77
belore the actual exocution of tho decroo, making
facilitator in the execution process, not a direct steptho precopt a
proceedings. in ox0cution
Interpleader Suits
ORoservod with AasimYozdani
(Quostion Format :Short Notos)
An
interpleader suit is a suit in which tho real dispute between
is
defendants only and the detendants interplead (plead against the
each
other) instead of pleading against the plaintiff in an ordinary suit.
Example: Aasim in possession of iphone 15 pro max which is not hie
and wants to hand over it to real owner. Rozy
and Shumayela both
claim Aasim may file an interpleader suit and let Rozy, Shumayela
it.
Indigent Suits
©Reserved with Aasim Yezdani
:
(Question Format Short Notes)
An "indigent person," is
do not have Court
I You are Indigont Porson.
Someone suffering from Fee. Iam very poor. Filo Indigent Suit.
extreme poverty and has no
means to pay Court fees.
Article 39A of the Indian
Constitution addresses this
by providing free legal aid to
the poor and weaker
sections, ensuring justice. Articles 14 and 22(1) further emphasze
state's duty to ensure legal equality and a system promoting justice.
78
Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 addresses this by
allowing persons to tile as indigent person. lo do So, one must subrnit
an annlication declaring
indigence to the competent court. If the court
rOtthat the person can not afford fees, it declares him indigent
person. Rule 1 to 18 of Order 33 specitically
deals with suits filed by
indigent persons, making9 justice more accessible despite financial
hardships.
Caveat
OReserved with Aasim Yezdani
(Question Format : Short Notes)
Section 148A of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 addresses the
lodging of a caveat, which is a precautionary measure to prevent one
party from obtaining an ex parte order without notifying the
other party.
A
caveat is a formal warning to the court, judge, or officer not to take a
specific action until the party entering the caveat has an opportunity to
be heard.
Objective of Caveat
1) Tosafeguard the interests of the caveator against potential adverse
orders.
2) To provide an opportunity for the caveator to be heard before any
order is passed.
3) To prevent multiple legal proceedings that could negatively impact
the caveator's interests.
Section 148A of CPC, 1908: Right to Lodge a Caveat
1) Any person with a right to appear before the court concerning a
specific application in a lawsuit can lodge a caveat.
2) Once lodged, the caveator must serve a notice of the caveat to the
party making or expecting to make the application.
79
4) The applicant, upon receiving notice of the caveat, must provide the
caveator with a copy of the application and supporting documerts
at the caveator's expensSe.
5) A caveat remains in force for 90 days, expiring autornaticaly if no
application is made within this period.
It is important to note that any person wh0se rights or interests rnay be
affected by a court order is eligible to file a caveat. This person may not
necessarily be a party to the suit but must have a legitirnate claim to he
heard.
Effect of Caveat
before ary
Once a caveat is filed, the caveator has the right to be heard
an order withcut
interim order is issued. The court cannot make such
a prerequisite for
serving notice to the caveator, making the notice
interim orders.
Rights and Duties related with Caveat
1) The caveator must serve a notice of the
caveat to the party making
the application.
caveatee (applicant) must provide the caveator with a copy of
2) The
documents.
the application and supporting
caveators.
court is obliged to serve notice of the petition on the
3) The
sufficient time to appear and oppose the
ensuring they have
intended application.
80