Back
C.HARI SHANKAR
Kleenoil Filtration India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Udit Khatri – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to file written statement justifies further court action. (Para 1) |
| 2. court has discretion to decree without affidavit. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. role of order viii r10 cpc clarified. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's cautious decision-making is essential. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. distinction between written statement and its implications. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. court must follow principles from precedents before making a decree. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. case renotified for further proceedings. (Para 16) |
1. Can, in a case in which the defendant fails to file written statement in response to the suit within the time stipulated in that regard and remains absent, the suit proceeding, ipso facto, to straightaway decree the suit, without any further process, including the calling for an affidavit-in-evidence from the plaintiff?
2. I had some misgivings on the point. Several orders have been passed by the learned Single Judges of this Court, decreeing the suit in such circumstances. Most of these orders invoke the jurisdiction of the Court under Order VIII Rule 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
3. What troubled me was whether, where there was no written stateme
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
