BERI, J.—This is a reference by a learned single Judge of this Court to resolve a conflict relating to the interpretation and consequent applicability of rules 2 and 3 of Order XVII of the Code of Civil Procedure which arise for certain decisions of this Court.

2. Before we formulate the question for answer it would be convenient to briefly notice the facts of the case before us. A suit for recovery of money was instituted before the Munsiff, Bikaner by a plaint dated 23rd May, 1955, on the basis of a deed of agreement concerning the sale and delivery of a lorry. The defendants filed a written statement dated 22nd February, 1956, denying the execution of the deed and the liability arising therefrom. The Munsiff Bikaner on 9th August, 1957 framed issues relating to (a) the execution of the deed and want of consideration; (b) the factum of delivery of lorry; (c) the penal character of the rate of interest claimed and (d) the relief. The suit stood fixed for the plaintiffs evidence on 19th September, 1957, on which date the plaintiff obtained an adjournment on payment of costs and the case was fixed for 19th October, 1957, on which date of hearing the counsel for the parties were prese

Click Here to Read the rest of this document