SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 854

RUMA PAL, C.K.THAKKER
THAKUR JI RAM JANKI JI – Appellant
Versus
SHANKAR DAYAL – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The dispute in this appeal arises out of a suit filed by the appellant, who is the father, against his son, the respondent. The appellant had filed the suit for possession alleging that the respondent had forcibly occupied a portion of the appellant's property. The suit was decreed in favour of the appellant by the trial court. The first appeal which was preferred by the respondent was dismissed. The respondent filed a second appeal which was allowed by the High Court solely on the ground that the provisions of Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 had not been complied with by the trial court.

3. Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 enables the court, when time has been granted to a party to produce evidence and he fails to do so or the case of either default on the part of the party with regard to the further progress in the suit, to either (a) if the parties are present, proceed to decide the suit forthwith, or (b) if the parties are, or any of them is, absent, proceed under Rule 2 Order 17.

4. The High Court was of the view that clause (a) of Rule 3 Order 17 requires the court to deliver judgment on the same day. Since the j




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top