JASPAL SINGH
NAIRS ARKIMETALS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
NEW DELHI HOTELS LIMITED – Respondent
( 1 ) SUB Rules 3 and 4 of Rule 3 of Order 37 of,the Code of Civil Procedure and Form 4-A in Appendix-B have given cause to this order. However, first a bonsai view of the back-drop.
( 2 ) THE suit is under Older 37. Consequent upon service of summons in Form 4 in Appendix-B, the defendant entered its appearance and thereupon complied with the requirement of sub-Rule 3 of Rule 3. Turn then came for the plaintiff to proceed according to sub-Rule 4 and it really did so, inasmuch as summons for judgment in Form 4-A in Appendix-B was served on the defendant. As the summons holds the pivot, I must reproduce it. It says:
UPON reading the affidavit of the plaintiff the court makes the following order, namely: Let all parties concerned attend the court on the 25th day of January, 1991 at O clock in the forenoon on the hearing of the application of the plaintiff that he be at liberty to obtain judgment in this suit against the defendant (or if against one or some or several insert names) for Rs. 2,72,767. 35 P and for interest and costs. Dated the 21st day of November, 1990. SUPERINTENDENT (0) for REGISTRAR. "
( 3 ) AS all the gowns do know, under sub-Rule 5, the defendant i
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.