1)

The Central Penal Code (CPC) is a uniform procedure applicable throughout India, with a
two-part structure consisting of substantive sections and procedural orders/rules. It is flexible,
allowing courts to interpret and modify procedures. The Principle of Natural Justice ensures a
fair hearing and impartial trial. Supplemental proceedings include temporary injunctions, arrest,
and attachment. Appeals, reviews, and revisions ensure a multi-tiered justice system. The
Doctrine of Res Judicata prevents multiple litigations on the same matter. The execution of
decrees is a mechanism for enforcing court decisions.

Decrees are formal expressions of an adjudication, while judgments are statements by judges
on the grounds of a decree/order. Orders are decisions of a court not amounting to a decree
and do not determine the rights or liabilities of the parties. They can be passed on a suit or
application and can be appealable or non-appealable. To constitute a decree, the court must
have formally expressed the rights or liabilities of the parties.

2)

The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) is a procedural law in India that governs the
administration of civil proceedings. It is divided into two parts: the Body of the Code (Sections 1
to 158) and the First Schedule (Orders and Rules). Substantive law defines principles regarding
rights and liabilities, while procedural law prescribes the procedure and machinery for enforcing
those rights and liabilities.

The CPC was passed in 1908 and came into force on January 1, 1909. It is applicable to the
entire country except for Jammu and Kashmir and Nagaland and tribal areas. The code has two
parts: the Body of the Code, which contains 12 parts containing 158 sections, and the Schedule,
which contains orders and rules for the court's jurisdiction.

The first schedule, which is the only schedule to the code, now has 51 orders, each containing
rules that vary in numbers from order to order. There are eight appendices giving model formats
such as pleadings, process formats, discovery, inspection and admission, decrees, execution,
supplemental proceedings, appeal, reference and reviews, and miscellaneous.

Amendments to the CPC can be made by the various High Courts, but they cannot alter or add
any rules in the schedules under Sections 122 to 127, 129, 130, and 131. The provisions of the
body of the code can only be amended by the legislature, while the courts cannot alter or
amend the body of the code.

In summary, the CPC is a procedural law that regulates civil proceedings in India, focusing on
procedural aspects rather than substantive law.
3)

The jurisdiction of a civil court is divided into territorial or local jurisdiction, pecuniary jurisdiction,
subject matter jurisdiction, and original and appellate jurisdiction. Territorial jurisdiction refers to
the limited power a court can exercise, such as a district judge in East Godavari District only
having powers within the district. Pecuniary jurisdiction refers to the limited power a civil court
has to try suits and appeals for the value of money not exceeding a stipulated amount. High
courts and the Court of Sessions have unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction, while Junior and Senior
Civil Judges have pecuniary jurisdiction of Rs. 3,00,000 and Rs. 10,00,000. Subject matter
jurisdiction refers to the specific nature of the case, such as small cases, industrial tribunals,
labor courts, and administrative tribunals.

Original jurisdiction refers to the court where the initial suit is filed, and if the court has
jurisdiction to try the original suits, it is called original jurisdiction. Appellate jurisdiction refers to
the court that hears the appeal, and the Supreme Court, High Court, and District Courts have
both original and appellate jurisdiction, allowing them to hear both appeals and original suits.

4)

Res Sub-judice is a principle in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 that prevents multiple instances
of suits relating to the same issue between the same parties. It is applicable to trials, appeals,
and revisions but does not bar a court from issuing temporary orders like injunctions or stays.

To invoke Section 10 of the CPC, certain conditions must be met, including having a matter at
issue and the same parties involved in both previous and subsequent suits. The previous suit
must have been filed in a court with jurisdiction to grant the desired relief. In the case of Escorts
Const. Equipment Ltd v. Action Const. Equipments Ltd (1998), the Delhi High Court stated that
certain conditions must be met, including having a matter at issue and the same parties involved
in both the previous and subsequent suits.

In the case of Arumugha Udayar Rep. by Power v. Lakshmi (2005), the Madras High Court
outlined four essential conditions to invoke Section 10 of the CPC, including the matter at issue
in the second lawsuit being significantly and directly related to the first lawsuit, the involvement
of the same parties or those acting on their behalf, the relief sought in the second lawsuit being
admissible in the court where the initial lawsuit was filed, and the previous suit must be pending
before a competent court.
Exceptions to the doctrine include unique and distinct claims in each suit, both common and
unique issues in the cases, different issues involved between the same parties, and it is not
necessary to raise all issues from the earlier suit in later litigation for Section 10 to be
applicable.

5)

Res Judicata is a legal principle that states that a court cannot try a matter where the parties
and subject matter are the same and has already been decided by a competent court. This
principle is based on several maxims, including nemo debet lis vexari pro eadem causa, which
emphasizes that no person should be tried twice for the same cause of action, and interest
republicae ut sit finis litium, which aims to bring finality to the litigation process.

Interest republicae ut sit finis litium aims to prevent parties from relitigating the same issues, as
it can lead to a waste of judicial resources and disrupt social order. Res judicata helps achieve
judicial certainty and stability in legal matters.

Res judicata pro veritate occipitur emphasizes that a judicial decision must be accepted as it
stands once a matter has been adjudicated and a final judgment rendered, giving conclusive
effect to the prior decision. However, there are specific circumstances when this doctrine does
not apply:

1. Fraud or misrepresentation of facts or issues;

2. The judgment is not pronounced on the merits of the case;
3. The special leave petition was dismissed without a proclamation or determination of the
judgment;
4. Subsequent lawsuits have different causes of action;
5. The court lacked competent jurisdiction in the former suit;
6. There is a question of law involved;
7. An interlocutory order was passed in a former suit;
8. There has been an amendment to the existing law that grants new rights to the party;
9. The suit was dismissed by default;
10. The party does not raise a plea for res judicata.

In summary, res judicata is a fundamental principle in Indian law that ensures the final
settlement of a matter. It is based on several maxims and exceptions, such as fraud,
misrepresentation, lack of competent jurisdiction, and non-renewal of rights.

6)
A suit is a civil process initiated by filing a plaint to enforce civil or substantive rights against the
state or a person. It results in a decree and can be no decree without a suit. The term'suit'
encompasses all actions taken by a person to enforce a legal right vested in them by law. In the
landmark case of Hansraj Gupta & Others v. Dehra Dun-Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd.
(1932), the Privy Council held that a civil proceeding is instituted by the presentation of a plaint.

Essentials of a suit include at least two opposing parties: the plaintiff who files the suit for relief
and the defendant against whom the plaintiff files for the claim. Order I, Rule 1 of the CPC
outlines the joinder of the plaintiffs to the suit, while Order I, Rule 3 outlines the joinder of the
defendants to the suits. Misjoinders occur when a party to the lawsuit is unintentionally added,
while non-joinders are not added to the suit.

A cause of action is the set of reasons on which a lawsuit is instituted in court, including all facts
or allegations related to rights and their infringement. Order II, Rule 2 of the CPC states that a
cause of action is essential, and a plaint must mention it if it is to be instituted as a suit. The
subject matter refers to the set of facts or details about a movable or immovable property that
gives rise to a civil dispute to claim remedies.

Relief is a legal remedy available to the plaintiff for a violation of legal rights by the defendant.
No remedy will be granted by a court unless the parties to the complaint request it. There are
two types of relief: specific and alternative, governed under the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

7)

The institution of a suit is the primary step in civil litigation, governed by Section 26 of the CPC
and Order IV. It requires the filing of a plaint or other legal form, and an affidavit to support the
facts. Order IV outlines the commencement of a suit by plaint, requiring the presentation of the
plaint to the court or designated official. The court must follow the rules outlined in Orders VI
and VII.

Rule 2 of Order IV deals with the registration of suits, requiring the Court to keep the particulars
of every suit in a register called the register of civil suits. A plaint is considered duly instituted if it
meets the criteria stated in sub-rules (1) and (2).

Section 80 of the CPC mandates that a legal notice be served before the filing of a suit if the
defendant is the government or a public officer. However, only some civil suits require this, and
advocates may serve a legal notice to inform the defendant that the sender is making the final
attempt to resolve the dispute.

The procedural aspect of the institution of suits includes preparing a plaint, choosing the
appropriate place of suing, and presenting the plaint.
8)

• A plaint is a legal document that a plaintiff submits to the court for compensation for any harm
caused by the defendant.
• The content of a plaint should include the name of the court, the plaintiff's name, description,
and address, the defendant's name, and if the plaintiff or defendant is a minor or unsound mind.
• The facts that give rise to the legal claim, when they occurred, and the facts that establish the
court's jurisdiction should also be included.
• The type of relief or compensation the plaintiff is seeking should also be stated.
• If the plaintiff has accepted a set-off or waived part of their claim, the amount they've allowed
or waived.
• A statement of the value of the subject matter of the civil suit should also be included.
• The Delhi High Court ruled that a plaint cannot be rejected in parts, but must be accepted or
rejected in its entirety.
• Grounds for rejecting a plaint include no valid cause of action, undervalued relief, inadequate
stamping, not filing the plaint in duplicate, and failure to comply with Rule 9.

9)

• The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) outlines the location and place where a civil suit can be
initiated.
• Sections 15 to 20 of the CPC specify that the plaintiff should file their suit in a court with the
lowest level of competence.
• In cases involving recovery of immovable property, partition, foreclosure, sale or redemption of
a mortgage or charge, determination of other rights or interests in immovable property,
compensation for damage to immovable property, or recovery of movable property under
distraint or attachment, suits must be initiated within the local jurisdiction where the subject
property is situated.
• If a suit is filed for relief or compensation for a wrongful act to immovable property, it may be
filed in a court within the local jurisdiction where the property is located or where the defendant
resides, conducts business, or earns a livelihood.
• This is based on the principle of "equity acts in personam," which means that equity applies to
a person rather than to property.
• Section 17 discusses the jurisdiction of suits involving immovable property located in the
jurisdictions of different courts.
• When immovable properties are situated in separate jurisdictions, the suit can be filed in any
court within the local jurisdiction where any portion of the property is located, as long as the
cause of action for both properties is the same.
• Section 18 addresses the location for initiating a civil suit in situations of uncertain court
jurisdiction.
• If there's doubt about which court should handle a case involving immovable property, any of
the courts involved can make a statement noting the uncertainty.
• If the court accepts this uncertainty and proceeds to hear the case, its judgment will be as valid
as if the property was within its local jurisdiction.
• Section 19 pertains to suits seeking compensation for harm to a person or movable property.
• In such cases, the plaintiff can choose to file the suit either in the jurisdiction where the
defendant resides, conducts business, or earns a livelihood or where the property is situated.
• Section 20 serves as a general provision for determining the location for filing a civil suit.

10)

• The court's order VII RULE 9 outlines the presentation of a plaint, including the submission of
a document list with the plaint, copies for defendants, payment for summons, representative
capacity, and verification by the court officer.
• Section 27 pertains to the issuance of summons to defendants or plaintiffs, which are
dispatched within thirty days after the suit is filed and served according to the specified
procedure.
• Section 28 deals with serving summons to defendants residing in other states, where the
summons must be forwarded to the court in that state, following its established rules.
• If the summons sent to another state is in a language different from the court's official
language, a translation of the record is required.
• Section 29 addresses the service of foreign summons, allowing summons and other legal
documents to be presented by any Civil or Revenue Court established in India, any Central
Government-established or maintained court outside India, or any other court outside India to
which the Central Government has extended the application of these provisions through an
official notification in the Gazette.
• These documents can be delivered to courts within the areas covered by the Code and served
as if they were issued by those local courts.
• Section 31 extends the principles of Sections 27, 28, and 29 to cover witness summonses,
governing the procedures for issuing and serving summonses for producing documents,
materials, or providing testimony.

11)

• Pleading under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a formal written statement submitted by
parties involved in a civil suit, outlining the claims and defenses of the plaintiff and defendant.
• The primary objective of pleadings is to clearly outline the issues in dispute, enabling the court
to understand the case and facilitate a fair and efficient trial.
• The CPC defines two main types of pleadings: the plaint, which details the facts of the case,
the legal basis for the claim, and the relief sought, and the written statement, which is the
response submitted by the defendant, addressing the allegations made in the plaint and
presenting any defenses.
• The basic rules of pleadings under CPC are outlined in Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 of Order VI.
• These rules include:

1.
• Pleading Facts, Not Law: Parties must state the facts upon which they base their claims, and
the court applies the law to these facts to render a judgement.
• 2.
• Material Facts Only: Pleadings should contain statements of material facts but not the
evidence by which those facts are to be proved.
• There are two types of facts: Facts Probanda (material facts) and Facts Probantia (evidence).
• 3.
• Conciseness: Facts should be presented concisely, without omitting important details, ensuring
brevity and clarity without sacrificing essential information.

12)

• Order VI Rule 17 of the Indian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) allows the court to alter or
amend pleadings at any stage of the proceedings, provided that no application for amendment
shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in
spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of
trial.
• Conditions for amending pleadings in CPC include necessity for dispute resolution, absence of
prejudice to the other party, good faith, and compliance with time limits.
• The Supreme Court of India has outlined additional conditions under which amendments of
pleadings can be allowed, such as change in the nature of the case, introduction of a new cause
of action, or defeat of the law of limitation.
• Amendment of pleadings may also be allowed in situations such as avoiding multiplicity of
suits, correcting wrongful descriptions, and adding omitted properties.
• The process for filing an application for amendment of pleadings involves a specific procedure,
which includes preparing an application, presenting the application before the relevant civil
judge, paying the necessary court fee, clearly state the purpose and reasons for seeking the
amendment, and receiving the court's approval.
• If the judge deems the proposed amendment essential for determining the real issues in
dispute between the parties, permission for the amendment will be granted.
• The court's decision depends on the specific factual background of the case, and if the facts
and circumstances demonstrate that the amendment is necessary to determine the cause of
action and avoid further litigation, the court should allow the application.
• Failure to amend within the prescribed time is a ground for rejecting the application, but the
court also has discretionary power to allow the amendment if it deems it necessary to secure
the ends of justice.
• In cases where an application for amending pleadings is debarred by the Limitation Act, it can
be a ground for rejecting the application.
• However, the court also has discretionary power to allow the amendment if it deems it
necessary to secure the ends of justice.
• In Pankaja & Anr v.
• Yellappa (D) by LRs & Ors, there is no fixed principle that dictates whether the court can reject
an application for amendment when it is barred by limitation.
• Insurender Kumar Sharma v.
• Makhan Singh emphasizes that even if an application for amendment is belated, the crucial
consideration is whether allowing the amendment would help resolve the real controversy
between the parties.
• Order VI Rule 17 grants courts wide powers and unfettered discretion to allow amendments,
and delay alone should not be a ground for refusing an amendment if it can be allowed with the
payment of costs.
• North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v.
• Bhagwan Das highlights the principles governing the granting or disallowing of amendments
under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC.
• Amendments can be made at any stage of the proceedings and should be allowed if they do
not cause injustice to the other side and are necessary for determining the real issues in dispute
between the parties.
• Amendments should only be refused if the other party cannot be placed in the same position
as if the pleading had been originally correct and the amendment would result in injury that
cannot be compensated through costs.

13)

• Summons are summons issued by the court to a defendant to appear in court, based on the
principle of natural justice.
• Section 27 of the CPC allows for summons to be issued to defendants to appear and answer
the claim within thirty days from the date of institution of the suit.
• The purpose of issuing a summons is to inform the defendant and give him a fair opportunity to
represent his side.
• Section 28 of the CPC provides for service of Summons in another State, prescribing delivery
according to the rules of that State.
• The court to which summons is sent shall act as if it had been issued by such Court.
• Sub-section 3 of Section 28 provides that the language of the sum is the same as if it had
been issued by such Court.
• Order V Rule 1 to 30 states that summons may be issued to the defendant to appear and
answer the claim and to file the written statement of his defense within 30 days of delivery of the
summons.
• A defendant may appear on issuance of summons in person, by a pleader duly instructed and
able to answer all material questions relating to the suit, or by a pleader accompanied by some
person able to answer all such questions.
• Mandates for issuance of summons include signing by the judge or such officers as he
appoints and sealing with the seal of the Court.
• Order V Rule 2 provides that every summon shall be accompanied by a copy of the plaint.
• Appearance in person is allowed by Order V Rule 3 of CPC, but no person shall be ordered to
appear in person unless they reside within the local limits of jurisdiction of the Court’s ordinary
original jurisdiction, or less than fifty or two hundred miles (where railway, steamer or other
public conveyance is available) distance from the courthouse.
• Exemptions from personal appearance include sections 132 and 133 of CPC, which exempt
certain women (such as Pardanashin Women) from personal appearance.
• Other provisions in CPC provide exemptions from personal appearance, such as section 132
and 133.
• Service of summons is provided by Order V Rule 5 to 8, which allows the court to issue
summons either for the settlement of issues only or for the final disposal of the suit.
• The proviso states that every suit heard by the Court of Small Causes shall be for the final
disposal of the suit.
• Acknowledgement of summons is provided by Order V, Rule 16 to 19, which states that
summons must be affixed at a conspicuous part of the house where the defendant originally
resides or personally works for gain or carries on business.
• The serving officer in all cases under rule 16 shall endorse or annex a return stating the time
and manner in which the summons was served.
• Substituted service of summons is also allowed by the court when it has reason to believe that
the defendant is purposefully avoiding service of Summons.
• The court can order service by affixing a copy of the summons in some conspicuous place in
the courthouse and upon some conspicuous part of the house in which the defendant is known
to have last resided, carried on business, or personally worked for gain.

14)

• Appearance refers to a party's active participation in legal proceedings, either through personal
appearance or representation by their legal representative.
• This can include attending hearings, presenting arguments, submitting evidence, and
responding to court directions.
• Non-appearance signifies the absence of a party from the court proceedings.
• If a party fails to attend or be represented by their legal representative, it is considered a
non-appearance.
• Rule 1 Order IX of CPC requires parties to attend the court on the designated date mentioned
in the summons.
• If the plaintiff or defendant fails to do so without providing a satisfactory reason, the suit will be
dismissed.
• If the defendant does not make an appearance, an ex-parte order will be issued.
• If neither party appears, the suit will be dismissed under Rule 3.
• The plaintiff has the option to request the court to reconsider the dismissal if they can
demonstrate valid reasons for their non-appearance.
• If only the plaintiff appears but the defendant does not, an ex-parte order can be passed
against the defendant.
• However, the plaintiff must prove that the summon was served to the defendant.
• If service of the summon is proven, only the court can proceed for an ex-parte against the
defendant and may pass a decree in favor of the plaintiff.
• Remedies against an ex-parte decree include applying to the court under Rule 13 Order 9,
appealing against that decree under section 96(2) or prefer revision under section 115 CPC,
applying review under Order 47 rule 1, and filing a suit on the ground of fraud.
• The limitation period for making an application for setting aside an ex-parte decree is 30 days.
• Order IX outlines the procedures for parties to appear on the day fixed in a summons for the
defendant to appear and answer.
• If the summons is not served due to the plaintiff's failure to pay costs, the suit may be
dismissed.
• If neither party appears when the suit is called on for hearing, the court may make an order
that the suit be dismissed.
• The plaintiff can bring a fresh suit or the court may restore the suit to file.
• If the plaintiff fails to apply for a fresh summons after a summons has been issued and
returned unserved, the court may dismiss the suit against the defendant unless the plaintiff has
within seven days satisfied the court that the summons was served properly.
• If only the plaintiff appears, the court may order the suit to be heard ex parte if the summons
was duly served.
• If not, a second summons will be issued and served on the defendant.
• If the summons was served but not in due time, the court will postpone the hearing to a future
day and direct notice to the defendant.
• If the plaintiff defaults on the summons, the court will order the plaintiff to pay the costs.
• If the defendant appears on the day of an adjourned hearing and assigns good cause for
previous non-appearance, they may be heard in answer to the suit as if they had appeared on
the day fixed for their appearance.
• If the defendant only appears and the plaintiff does not appear, the court may dismiss the suit
unless the defendant admits the claim or part thereof.
• If part of the claim has been admitted, the court will dismiss the suit.

15)
• In a civil suit, the application for discovery of documents must be filed after the plaint and
written statement are presented before the court.
• The plaintiff or defendant can make this application if they believe their opponent's case has
not been sufficiently disclosed in the pleadings.
• If the court is satisfied that such discovery is necessary, the party making the application is
accredited with documents in possession of the other party or any power relevant to the issue in
the suit.
• Order XI Rule 12 empowers the party to make an application for discovery of documents to the
court seeking those documents that are in possession or power of the other party.
• This application may be filed without filing any affidavit.
• If the court determines that such discovery is not required or important at that stage of the suit,
it either rejects the application or adjourns it.
• The court has discretionary power to deal with such applications, passing an order that will
allow the party's access to certain documents only.
• Order XI Rule 13 requires the party against whom an application for discovery of a document
to make an affidavit specifying the documents that they object to produce and supply to the
other party.
• When the case involves more than one plaintiff or defendant, all parties must collectively make
an affidavit of documents, subject to reasons contrary to the respective parties.
• Order XI Rule 14 empowers the court to order the party against whom an application for
production of the document to produce such documents in their possession or power.
• After producing the documents, the court can look into them fairly and properly.
• Discovery of Documents (Rule 12) is different from production of documents (Rule 14), as the
latter requires the court itself to ask the other party to produce documents.
• If the party fails to produce the documents, the court makes an adverse presumption against
them.
• Order XI Rule 15 allows parties to serve notices to other parties seeking the production of
documents mentioned in pleadings or affidavits.
• These notices can be found by checking attached lists with the plaintiff or W.S.
• The parties must comply with the notice and demand copies of the documents.
• If a party fails to comply, they will not be allowed to put the document as evidence in the case.
• Order XI Rule 16 requires the party to make a notice for the production of documents
mentioned in the Plaint or W.S.
• under Form No.
• 7 of Appendix C, subject to changes depending on the facts and circumstances.
• Order XI Rule 17 requires the party to reply within ten days from receiving the notice, providing
a timeframe of three days to check the documents for inspection.
• The place of inspection can be at the pleader's office or at the normal place of custody if the
documents are books of accounts, bankers' books, or books used in business.
• Order XI Rule 18(1) empowers the court to pass an order regarding the inspection of
documents if the party fails to give notice within ten days or puts certain conditions like raising
objections to produce the documents or offers the documents at a different place.
• The court may pass such an order in response to the application made by the party
demanding the documents for inspection.
• Order XI Rule 18(2) makes it compulsory for the party making an application for inspection to
list down the documents required for inspection in the form of an affidavit.
• If inspection of business books is sought, the court may direct a verified copy of the
documents.

16)

• Remand under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) is a legal process where an appellate court
directs a lower court to reconsider or retry a case if it finds that the trial court has disposed of the
case prematurely or without addressing all essential issues.
• The purpose of remanding a case is to rectify procedural or substantive errors committed by
the lower court, allow additional evidence or clarification, and ensure complete and fair
adjudication of the dispute.
• Section 107(1)(b) of the CPC empowers an appellate court to remand a case, which can be
done in various ways.
• For instance, the court can decide a case finally without sending it back to the lower court,
remand the case for a fresh trial or further proceedings, frame issues and refer for trial, and take
additional evidence in special circumstances.
• Order XLI Rule 23 allows the appellate court to remand a case when a case has been
disposed of on a preliminary point and reverses the decree, while Order XLI Rule 23A allows
the appellate court to remand a case when further inquiry is needed.
• Order XLI Rule 25 allows the appellate court to direct the lower court to try a material issue
when the trial court omitted to frame or decide a material issue.
• The procedure of remanding a case includes filing an appeal, reviewing the lower court's
records and proceedings, making a decision to remand, taking actions by the lower court, and
issuing a new judgment after reconsidering the case as per the appellate court instructions.

Unit 2

17)

• The Central Government (CGP) is the central government of India, responsible for regulating
the conduct of public officers and ensuring that they are not involved in legal proceedings.
• The CPC has several provisions that govern the process of filing suits by or against the
government.
• Section 79 of the CPC mandates that the government should be named as the appropriate
party in suits by or against the government.
• In cases involving the Central Government, the Union of India is named as the plaintiff or
defendant, while in suits involving the State Government, the concerned States are named.
• Section 80 mandates a notice to be served before a suit is filed against the government or a
public officer.
• This procedural requirement allows the government or officer a chance to reconsider its
position and settle the matter before it proceeds to litigation.
• Order XXVII of the CPC specifically deals with suits involving the government or public officers
acting in their official capacity.
• The order provides detailed procedural guidelines for such suits, outlining how the government
is represented in court and the formalities required to ensure the government's participation in
legal proceedings.
• Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC outline the signing and verification of pleadings, recognized agents,
simplified pleadings, the designation of the Government Pleader, time for communication,
joining the government as a co-defendant in suits against public officers, assistance in
settlement, attendance of officials, extension of time, and government defense in suits against
public officers.
• Landmark cases under the CPC include Bihari Chowdhary v.
• State of Bihar (1984), Union of India v.
• RC Jall (1985), and Lalchand Chowdhury v.
• Union of India (1959).
• These cases have highlighted the importance of the CPC in advancing justice by giving the
government or public officer an opportunity to settle matters before litigation begins.
• In the case of Lalchand Chowdhury v.
• Union of India, the court ruled that if new facts are discovered after the suit's institution, a fresh
Section 80 notice is not mandatory, provided that the relief sought remains the same and the
suit is not fundamentally altered in nature.
• The court also observed that service of notice under Section 80 is integral to the cause of
action, but the government can waive it explicitly or by its conduct, or be estopped from later
objecting if it fails to raise it properly in pleadings.

18)

• The Indian Majority Act, 1875, defines minors and persons of unsound mind as individuals who
have not reached the age of 18.
• If a guardian is appointed by the court for the minor's person or property, the age of majority is
extended to 21 years.
• A person of unsound mind refers to an individual who cannot protect their interests due to
mental infirmity and their condition may be adjudicated by the Court either before or during the
suit.
• Order XXXII of the CPC is specifically designed to protect the interests of minors and persons
of unsound mind by ensuring they are properly represented in legal proceedings.
• Due to their lack of capacity and judgement, these individuals cannot legally bind themselves
except in cases beneficial to them.
• Therefore, the appointment of a guardian or next friend is crucial to safeguard their legal rights
and interests.
• Provisions for suits by or against minors and persons of unsound mind under Order XXXII
include:

1.
• Minor to Sue by Next Friend
Every suit by a minor must be instituted in the minor’s name by a person called the next friend.
• The next friend represents the minor in all legal proceedings, ensuring that the minor’s
interests are adequately protected.
• 2.
• Where Suit is Instituted without Next Friend
If a suit is filed on behalf of a minor without a next friend, the defendant can apply to have the
plaint taken off the file.
• The person who presented the plaint may be ordered to pay the costs incurred by the
defendant.
• Notice of such an application must be given to the person who filed the suit and the Court,
after hearing their objections, may make an appropriate order.
• 3.
• Security to be Furnished by Next Friend when Ordered
The Court can require the next friend of a minor to provide security for the payment of all costs
incurred or likely to be incurred by the defendant.
• This provision, introduced by the Amendment Act of 1976, aims to prevent frivolous litigation
by ensuring that the next friend has a vested interest in the suit and is financially accountable.
• 4.
• Guardian for the Suit to be Appointed by Court for Minor Defendants
When a minor is a defendant, the Court must appoint a guardian for the suit, known as a
guardian ad litem.
• The guardian ad litem is responsible for defending the minor throughout the legal proceedings
unless terminated by retirement, removal, or death.
• 5.
• Decree Against Minor not to be Set Aside Unless Prejudice Has been Caused to His Interest
A decree against a minor will not be set aside merely because the next friend or guardian had
an adverse interest.
• However, if this adverse interest prejudices the minor, it is a valid ground for setting aside the
decree.
• 6.
• Representation of Minor by Next Friend or Guardian for the Suit
All applications and orders concerning a minor in a suit must be made through the minor’s next
friend or guardian.
• Any orders made without such representation can be set aside if it is shown that the pleader
knew or should have known about the minor’s status.
• 7.
• Agreement or Compromise by Next Friend or Guardian for the Suit
A next friend or guardian cannot enter into any agreement or compromise on behalf of the minor
without the Court’s permission.
• 8.
• Retirement of Next Friend
A next friend cannot retire without first finding a suitable replacement and providing security for
costs already incurred.
• 9.
• Removal of Next Friend
The Court can remove a next friend if their interest is adverse to the minor, they are connected
to the defendant, fail to perform their duties, or for any other sufficient cause.
• 10: Stay of Proceedings on Removal, etc., of Next Friend
If a next friend retires, is removed, or dies, the proceedings are stayed until a new next friend is
appointed.
• 11: Retirement, Removal or Death of Guardian for the Suit
The Court can permit the retirement, removal, or replacement of a guardian during the suit.
• 12: Course to be Followed by Minor Plaintiff or Applicant on Attaining Majority
When a minor plaintiff attains majority, they must decide whether to continue with the suit,
dismiss it, or apply to proceed in their own name.

19)

• An interpleader suit is a legal action initiated by a person or entity holding property, funds, or
assets claimed by two or more conflicting parties.
• It is filed when the party holding the property has no interest in it except for potential charges
or costs and seeks to avoid liability or multiple lawsuits.
• The real dispute does not lie between plaintiff and defendant but multiple defendants
interplead against each other.
• The provisions for the interpleader suit are provided under Section 88 and Order 35 of the Civil
Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC).
• The conditions on which an interpleader suit can be instituted include two or more persons
adversely claiming the same debts, sum of money, or other property from another, the property
may be movable or immovable, the claimant claims no interest in it other than for charges or
costs, there must not be any pending suit under which the rights of all parties can properly be
decided, the claimant is willing to pay the debt or some amount of money, or property to the
defendant, and the suit cannot be filed twice if the judgment is given in Res judicata.
• The procedure for institution of an interpleader suit is provided under Order 35 (Interpleader) of
CPC, which states that the plaintiff must state that they claim no interest in the subject-matter in
dispute other than for charges or costs, that the claims are made by the defendants severally,
and that there is no collusion between the plaintiff and any of the defendants.
• The purpose and rationale of an interpleader suit are to prevent multiplicity of litigation, ensure
that the real dispute between the defendants is resolved in the interpleader suit, and avoid
unnecessary hardship for the stakeholder/plaintiff.
• Order XXXV Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 addresses the procedure at the first
hearing of an interpleader suit.
• The court has certain powers and options, including releasing the plaintiff from all liabilities,
retaining parties, framing and trying other issues, and allowing any complainant to be made a
plaintiff.
• Rule 5 states that agents and tenants cannot institute interpleader suits against their principal
and landlord respectively.
• The plaintiff's role is to bring disputing parties before the court and let the court decide who has
the rightful claim.
• Rule 6 empowers the court to secure or compensate the plaintiff for their costs of initiating and
conducting the suit.
• The court can order that the plaintiff's costs be paid out of the property or money in dispute,
ensuring that the plaintiff is not financially burdened for facilitating the resolution of a dispute
they have no interest in.
• An interpleader suit may be re-instituted if the original suit was dismissed on technical
grounds, there has been no adjudication on the merits, or the same parties still have conflicting
claims on the same subject matter.
• In such cases, the plaintiff may file a fresh interpleader suit, assuming it does not violate any
rules such as Res judicata under Section 11 CPC or jurisdictional conflict.
• In Neeraj Sharma v.
• the District Sangrur Khadi Gram, the Punjab and Haryana High Court clarified that agents and
tenants are not allowed to file interpleader suits against their principals and landlords, as per
Order XXXV Rule 5.
• Interpleader suits are intended to resolve claims made through the person initiating the suit,
and if someone is claiming a right and interest in the property without reference to the landlord
and principal, the court must decide whether to release the plaintiff or retain them until the suit
reaches its final resolution.

20)

• What is a Summary Suit?

• A summary suit is a special type of legal proceeding under the Code of Civil Procedure(CPC)
designed to provide a swift remedy in civil disputes that involve a clear-cut claim.
• These suits typically involve claims based on negotiable instruments (such as cheques, bills of
exchange or promissory notes) or cases where the plaintiff seeks to recover a liquidated sum of
money arising from an agreement or contract.
• The primary goal of summary suits is to prevent unnecessary delays in resolving disputes
where there is little to no dispute over the facts of the case.
• This mechanism is especially useful in commercial transactions where speed is often
essential.
• Applicability of Summary Suits
Types of Cases Covered
Summary suits are typically filed in the following types of cases:
Suits based on negotiable instruments: These include bills of exchange, promissory notes, and
cheques.
• Debt recovery cases: When the plaintiff seeks to recover a debt or liquidated demand in
money, with or without interest, arising from:
A written contract,
An enactment (for fixed sums of money or non-penalty debts),
A guarantee, specifically when the claim is for a debt or liquidated demand.
• Jurisdiction
Summary suits can be filed in the court that has territorial jurisdiction over the matter.
• The suit can be filed in:
Courts of Small Causes,
City Civil Courts,
High Courts, and
Any other court as notified by the High Court.
• The High Court has the authority to modify the scope of suits that can be filed under Order
XXXVII.
• Key Differences Between Summary Suits and Ordinary Suits
Right to Defence
One of the most significant differences between a summary suit and an ordinary suit is the right
to defend.
• In an ordinary suit, the defendant has an automatic right to defend the case.
• The defendant can raise a defence and present evidence to challenge the plaintiff’s claim.
• In a summary suit, the defendant does not have an automatic right to defend.
• The defendant must apply to the court for leave (permission) to defend the suit.
• The leave is granted only if the defendant can establish that there is a triable issue (a genuine
dispute) regarding the claim.
• Procedure
In an ordinary suit, the process is lengthy, with witness examination, cross-examination, and
production of evidence.
• A full trial takes place before the court decides the case.
• In a summary suit, the process is streamlined.
• The court may pass a judgement without a full trial if the defendant does not raise any
significant objections or disputes.
• Timeframe
Because the procedure is simplified, summary suits are typically resolved faster than ordinary
suits.
• While an ordinary suit can take months or even years to conclude, a summary suit is designed
to be concluded in a matter of weeks, depending on the complexity of the case.
• Evidence
In an ordinary suit, the court considers a wide range of evidence, including witness testimony
and expert reports.
• In a summary suit, the court relies primarily on the written evidence, such as the negotiable
instrument or the agreement, which supports the plaintiff’s claim.
• If the defendant raises a genuine defence, the court will allow them to present additional
evidence.
• Procedure for Filing a Summary Suit
The procedure for filing and defending a summary suit is laid down in Order XXXVII of the CPC.
• It is a simplified and faster process, as outlined below:
Initiating the Suit
The plaintiff initiates a summary suit by filing a plaint in the court with jurisdiction.
• Once the court accepts the plaint, it issues a summons to the defendant, informing them of the
suit.
• Summons for Judgement
After the summons is issued, the plaintiff serves a summons for judgement to the defendant.
• This is a notice asking the defendant to either:
Accept the plaintiff’s claim and settle the matter,
Or apply for leave to defend within the prescribed period (usually 10 days).
• Leave to Defend
If the defendant wishes to defend the suit, they must apply for leave to defend.
• The defendant must file an affidavit explaining the facts and reasons for contesting the claim.
• The court examines whether the defendant’s affidavit raises a triable issue.
• If the court believes the defendant’s defence is valid, it grants leave to defend.
• If the defence is found to be frivolous or illusory, the court may reject the application and pass
a decree in favour of the plaintiff.
• Judgement and Decree
If the defendant does not apply for leave to defend, or if their application is rejected, the plaintiff
is entitled to a decree for the amount claimed.
• This decree may include interest and costs.
• Limitation Period for Filing a Summary Suit
The limitation period for filing a summary suit is governed by the Indian Limitation Act, 1963.
• According to the Act, a summary suit must be filed within three years from the date the cause
of action arises.
• This time limit is similar to that for ordinary suits, ensuring that claims are not delayed for an
unreasonable period.

Unit 3

21)
• The term "execution" in the Indian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) refers to the enforcement or
giving effect to a judgement or order of a court of justice.
• In its widest sense, execution signifies the enforcement of decrees and orders by the process
of the court, enabling the decree-holder to realize the fruits of the decree.
• The Supreme Court has provided extensive provisions for dealing with the executability of a
decree in all aspects, including the numerous rules of Order 21 of the Code.
• Decrees may be executed either by the court that passed it or by the court to which it is sent
for execution.
• A court which has neither passed a decree nor a decree is transferred for execution, cannot
execute it.
• Section 37 of the Code defines the expression "court which passed a decree," and the
following courts fall within the said expression: (i) the court of first instance which actually
passed the decree; (ii) the court of first instance in case of appellate decrees; (iii) where the
court of first instance has ceased to exist, the court which would have jurisdiction to try the suit
at the time of execution; and (iv) where the court of first instance has ceased to have jurisdiction
to execute the decree.
• In cases where a part of the area within the jurisdiction of court A is transferred to court B, two
questions arise: whether court A continues to have jurisdiction to entertain an application for
execution and whether court B can also entertain an application for execution without a formal
transmission of the decree from court A to B.
• The Supreme Court's pronouncement in the case of Merla Ramanna v.
• Nallaparaju, AIR 1956 SC 87, held that it is settled law that the court which actually passed the
decree does not lose its jurisdiction to execute it, by reason of the subject-matter being
transferred subsequently to the jurisdiction of another court.
• Sections 38 to 46 of the CPC Code outline the various ways a decree can be executed.
• The court that passed the decree can send it to another competent court if the person
(judgment-debtor) lives, works, or does business within that court's area, has no property in the
original court's area but has property in the other court's area, the decree involves immovable
property outside the original court's area, or the court feels there's another good reason (must
record this in writing).
• The court executing a transferred decree has the same powers as if it passed the decree,
including power to further transfer the decree, act against legal heirs of a deceased debtor, and
attach a decree.
• However, it cannot allow a transferee of the decree to execute it or allow execution against
partners in a firm without proper leave.
• Case laws for executing a decree include Ramkumar v.
• Hazarimal (1961), Salem Advocate Bar Assn.
• (2005), and Salem Advocate Bar Assn.

22)
• The court that passed a decree is primarily responsible for executing it, but may send the
decree for execution to another court if there are grounds such as the judgement-debtor
residing or working for gain within the local limits of the court's jurisdiction, not having sufficient
property to satisfy the decree within the local limits of the court's jurisdiction, directs the sale or
delivery of immovable property outside the local limits of the court's jurisdiction, or considers it
necessary for any other reason to be recorded in writing.
• The decree-holder has no vested or substantive right to get the decree transferred to another
court, and the court has discretion to decide it.
• Section 39 of the Code allows the court to issue precept to a court competent to execute the
decree to attach any property belonging to the judgment-debtor.
• However, an order of permanent attachment under Section 46 is illegal.
• Applying for execution can be filed by the decree-holder, legal representative of the
decree-holder, representative of the decree-holder, any person claiming under the
decree-holder, transferee of the decree-holder, one or more joint decree-holders, or any person
having special interest.
• Execution may be taken out against the judgment-debtor, legal representative of the
judgement-debtor, representative of or the person claiming under the judgement-debtor, and
surety of the judgement-debtor.
• Rule 22 provides for the issue of show-cause notices to persons against whom execution is
applied for in certain cases.
• The law does not require any notice to be issued for execution, but in certain cases, such
notice must be issued.
• Failure to give notice is a defect that renders proceedings null and void unless the
judgement-debtor waives it.
• Sub-rule (2) of Rule 22 allows the court to dispense with such notice if it would cause
unreasonable delay or defeat the ends of justice.
• The period of limitation for the execution of a decree (other than a decree granting a
mandatory injunction) is 12 years from the date of the decree, while the period of limitation for
the execution of a decree for mandatory injunction is 3 years from the date of the decree.

23)

• The Code of Civil Procedure outlines various modes of execution for different types of
decrees.
• Rule 26 allows the transferee court to stay the execution of a decree for a reasonable time,
allowing the judgement-debtor to apply for a stay against the execution.
• Rule 28 states that the transferee court is bound by an order made by the court which passed
the decree or by an appellate court in relation to execution of such decree.
• Rule 29 enacts that if a suit by the judgement-debtor is pending in a court against the
decree-holder, the court may stay execution of the decree until disposal of such suit.
• This provision aims to enable the judgement-debtor and the decree-holder to adjust their
claims against each other and avoid multiplicity of execution proceedings.
• Section 51 outlines various modes of execution, including delivery of property, attachment and
sale, arrest and detention in prison, appointment of receiver, and other manners as the nature of
relief granted may require.
• Section 47 is one of the most important provisions in the Code relating to execution, applying
only to matters arising subsequent to the passing of a decree and dealing with objections to
execution, discharge, and satisfaction of a decree.
• To apply this section, conditions must be satisfied:

a) The question must be one arising between the parties to the suit in which the decree is
passed or their representatives (not only legal representatives, but also
representative-in-interest), and it must relate to the execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the
decree.
• Both conditions must be satisfied cumulatively.
• Order 21 Rule 58 postulates that where any property (whether movable or immovable) is
attached in execution of a decree, it is always open to the parties, their representatives, or third
parties having some right, title, or interest in or possessed of the property attached, to raise
objection against such attachment.
• If the objection is raised by a party or their representative, the question falls under Section 47
of the Code and should be decided by the executing court.
• Order 21 Rule 97 and 99 differ in their application.
• Section 47 applies to parties to the suit or their representatives, while Order 21 Rule 58 applies
to third parties or their representatives.
• Section 47 bars a suit and an appeal, while Order 21 Rule 98 or 100 applies only when the
immovable property alone is delivered to the judgment-holder or auction-purchaser in execution
of a decree.
• In summary, the Code of Civil Procedure provides various modes of execution for different
types of decrees, with the latter being more specific and applicable to specific situations.

24)

• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 allows for various methods to execute a decree, including
arrest and detention.
• Section 51(c) allows the court to execute a decree through arrest and detention, subject to
judicial discretion.
• The court must be satisfied that the debtor has the means to pay but is deliberately refusing to
comply.
• The procedure for arrest includes a notice to show cause, a subsistence allowance, hearing
and inquiry, release and re-arrest, and exemptions from arrest.
• Certain categories of people cannot be arrested under Section 56 and Section 60, such as
women in execution of money decrees, judgment-debtors with serious illness, legislators during
sessions, and persons declared exempt by state notification.
• Detention periods for decrees are limited to less than ₹2,000, ₹2,000 – ₹5,000, and above
₹5,000, with no arrest allowed if the decree is for less than ₹2,000.
• Release does not discharge the debt, as it can still be recovered through other means.
• Constitutional and human rights limitations include Article 21 of the Constitution and Article 11
of the ICCPR.
• The Supreme Court in the Landmark Case, Jolly George Varghese v.
• Bank of Cochin, held that mere default in payment is not enough for arrest, and arrest must
comply with constitutional guarantees under Article 21 and international human rights.

25)

• Sections 60-64 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) outline the process for attaching property to
satisfy a decree.
• This includes land, houses, buildings, goods, cash, banknotes, cheques, hundis, promissory
notes, government securities, bonds, debts, shares, and any other saleable movable or
immovable property over which the judgment-debtor has disposing power.
• Exemptions under Section 60 include basic personal items, tools of artisans or agriculture
implements, cattle, essential seed grain, houses owned by small farmers, laborers, or domestic
workers, books of account, right to sue for damages, personal service rights, pension, gratuities,
wages, partial salary exemption, provident fund, insurance proceeds, etc.
• Section 61 provides partial exemption for agricultural produce, protecting a portion until the
next harvest.
• If multiple courts have attached the same property, the highest court or the one first attaching
the property has authority to handle it.
• Section 64 voids post-attachment transfers, while transactions completed before attachment
remain valid.
• Procedure under Order XXI (Rules 41-57 CPC) includes property examination, pending
amount (rent/mesne profits), physical seizure of assets, agricultural produce, property not in
possession, property in court or public custody, attachment of decrees, immovable property,
removal of attachment, and determination of attachment.
• In Radha Kishan vs.
• Ludhiana Municipality AIR 1963 SC 1547, the Supreme Court held that attachment
proceedings must strictly comply with procedural safeguards under CPC.
• If notice is not properly served or affixed, the attachment is illegal and void.
• The object of affixing notice is to give public information and an opportunity to the
judgment-debtor.
• The Supreme Court concluded that non-compliance with Order XXI Rule 54 CPC makes the
attachment invalid.
• Protection of property rights must be balanced with the rights of the decree-holder through
proper legal procedure.

26)

• The Civil Procedure Code, 1908, outlines the process of dividing proceeds from the sale or
attachment of a judgment-debtor's property among multiple decree-holders or claimants.
• Section 73 of the CPC deals with the distribution of assets when a judgment-debtor's property
is sold in execution of one or more decrees and multiple decree-holders have claims pending
against the same judgment-debtor.
• Key conditions under Section 73 include a sale in execution of a decree by a court, multiple
decrees against the same judgment-debtor, application for execution by decree-holders to the
same court or a court to which the original court is subordinate, and timing before the receipt of
sale proceeds by the court.
• The proceeds from the sale are distributed rateably among all decree-holders who have
applied for execution before the receipt of assets.
• Section 73 does not apply when sale proceeds are insufficient and only one decree-holder has
applied, or in cases of mortgage decrees or decrees with specific charges.
• The rateable distribution applies only if the decree-holder applies before the assets are
received by the court.

Unit 4

27)

• The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 is a significant legislative update that has
significantly changed the procedural aspects of civil litigation in India.
• It introduced provisions related to electronic filing and service of documents, alternative
dispute resolution (ADR), fast track courts, case management, execution proceedings, limitation
periods, appeals, interlocutory orders, ex parte decrees, court fees, service of summons,
Judicial magistrates and small causes courts, amendment of pleadings, summons in suits by or
against government or public officers, limitation for execution of decrees and orders, costs, stay
of suits, subordinate courts, exemption of certain persons from personal appearance,
compromise and withdrawal of suits, appeals to the Supreme Court, enforcement of decrees
and orders, conferment of additional powers on courts, and transitional provisions.
• The amendment modernized the process by introducing provisions related to electronic filing
of documents and electronic service of summons, notices, and other documents.
• It also emphasized the use of alternative dispute resolution methods like mediation, arbitration,
and conciliation to encourage parties to settle disputes outside the court system, reducing the
burden on the courts.
• Fast track courts were established to deal with specific types of cases or cases involving
certain sections of society, expediting the resolution of cases and reducing the backlog of cases
in regular courts.
• Case management provisions were introduced, allowing courts to actively manage the
progress of cases, setting timelines for various stages of the litigation process to ensure timely
disposal of cases.
• The amendment also revised the structure of court fees, making changes to the fee structure
for various types of cases and appeals.
• Additionally, the amendment introduced provisions for substituted service of summons,
allowing courts to serve summons through alternative means if traditional methods were not
feasible.
• Judicial magistrates and small causes courts were granted additional powers, while
subordinate courts were enhanced to handle cases involving higher monetary values.
• In conclusion, the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 has significantly improved
the procedural aspects of civil litigation in India.
• It introduced new provisions for electronic filing and service of documents, alternative dispute
resolution methods, fast track courts, case management, execution proceedings, and the
transfer of cases between courts.

28)

• Order V of the Code outlines the process for issuing and serving summons.
• The Malamath Committee proposed amendments to the Code to address the issue of cases in
courts and establish a fixed time frame for pleadings.
• The Amendment Act of 2002 amended Rule 1 [Summons], Rule 9 [Delivery of summons by
Court], and Rule 9A [Summons given to the plaintiff for service] of Order V.
• Sub-rule (1) of Rule 1 requires summons to be issued to the defendant for appearance and
answering the plaintiff's claim on the institution of a suit by filing a written statement of defense
within 30 days from the day of the suit's institution.
• If the defendant does not file the statement within 30 days, they may file it for reasons to be
recorded in writing, which shall not exceed ninety days from the date of service of summons.
• Rule 9 of Order V was substituted by Rules 9 and 9A of the Amendment Act of 2002.
• Sub-rules (1) and (4) prescribe two different situations for the delivery of the summons to the
defendant: if the defendant resides within the jurisdiction of the court or their agent, the summon
shall be delivered by the proper officer or courier services approved by the Court.
• If the defendant resides outside the jurisdiction, the Court may direct the service of summons
by delivering the copy by speed post, courier services approved by the High Court, or other
means of transmission of documents, at the expense of the plaintiff.
• Rule 9 empowers the High Court or the District Court to prepare a panel of courier agencies
for service of summons.
• To avoid delays in delivery, the Court empowers the plaintiff for the service of summons under
Rule 9A, which states that the Court may allow the plaintiff to serve the summon for the
defendant's appearance.

29.

Plaint. :
• The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002, amended Rule 9 (Procedure on
admitting plaint), Rule 11 (Rejection of plaint), and Rule 14 (Production of document on which
plaintiff sues or relies of Order VII) to expedite the process of serving summons on defendants.
• The new rule requires the plaintiff to present copies of the plaint within seven days of the
order's date, along with the necessary process fee.
• The old rule had no time limit, but the new rule aims to expedite the process.
• The old rule required the plaintiff to endorse or annex the list of documents filed along with the
plaint, or file concise statements of the nature of the claim or relief claimed in the suit with the
court's prior.
• Both provisions have been omitted as unnecessary to shorten case delays.
• In Rule 11, sub-clause (f) and (g) were substituted, allowing the court to reject the plaint if the
plaintiff fails to comply with Rule 9 provisions.
• Sub-rule (3) of Rule 14 was substituted, allowing the plaintiff to produce documents that should
be produced during the presentation of a plaint or entered in the list or annexed to the plaint with
the court's permission.
• The Amendment Act of 2002 omitted Rule 18.

30)

Written statement:

• The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002, amended Rule 1 (Written Statement),
Rule 1A (Duty of defendant to produce documents upon which relief is claimed or relied upon by
him), Rule 9 (Subsequent pleadings), and Rule 10 (Procedure when party fails to present
written statement called for by Court).
• Rule 1 requires the defendant to present the written statement within thirty days from the date
of service of the summon.
• By 2002, the defendant can file a written statement thereafter with the court's permission but
not beyond ninety days if the court has extended this period for reasons to be recorded in
writing.
• Sub-rule (3) of Rule 1A was substituted by the Amendment Act, 2002, which states that a
document produced in court by the defendant but not produced shall not be received in
evidence without the court's leave.
• This rule does not apply to documents produced for cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness
or handed over a witness merely to refresh their memory.
• Rule 9 was restored by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002, with the addition
of "of not more than thirty days" after the words "and fix a time" and before the words "for
presenting the same." This change allows subsequent pleadings to be filed and the court to fix
the time for presenting the document, which must be no more than thirty days.

31)
• The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 has amended Rule 2 and Rule 4 in the
hearing of the suit and examination of witnesses.
• Rule 2 allows any party to address oral arguments in a case and submit written arguments in
support of their case, which form part of the record.
• Sub-rules 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D of Rule 2 state that no adjournment shall be granted for the
purpose of filing written arguments unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing,
considers it necessary.
• Rule 4 substitutes Rule 4 and states that the examination-in-chief of a witness must be
recorded on an affidavit.
• The Commissioner can conduct and record cross-examination and re-examination of a witness
in High Courts having original jurisdiction and in Courts subordinate to the High Court.
• Evidence shall be recorded either by the Court or by the Commissioner appointed by it.
• The Commissioner also possesses the power to record the demeanor of a witness, and any
objection made in regard to such matter shall be decided by the Court at the time of arguments
of the case.
• A commissioner is under the obligation to submit his report within six months from the date of
the issue of the Commission, and the court may fix the amount to be paid as remuneration for
the services of the Commissioner.

32)

• The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 has amended Rule 32 and Rule 92
regarding the execution of decrees and orders.
• The amendment addresses a controversy over the meaning of the words "required to be done"
in sub-rule (5) of Rule 32, which covers both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions.
• The amendment also introduces a wider view by replacing the words "thirty days" with "sixty
days" in sub-rule (2) of Rule 92.
• The amendment is based on the recommendations of the Law Commission in the 139th
Report to bring harmony between sub-rule (2) of Rule 92 and Article 127 of The Indian
Limitation Act, 1963.
• The period for making a deposit under sub-rule (2) of Rule 92 before the amendment was
thirty days, while under Article 127, the limitation period for making an application to set aside
an execution sale is sixty days.
• The amendment addresses the differing views of different High courts on the subject.