SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Rajasthan State Electricity Board – Appellant
Versus
Ram Deo – Respondent
(2). Mr. R.K. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the appellants canvassed that the various High Courts had occasion to interpret the aforesaid sub rule (3) of Rule 1 of Order 41 along with Rule 5 of Order 41 CPC. and it was held that the afore- said rule is not mandatory in nature.
(3). The basic ruling in this regard is Union Bank of India and another vs. Jagan Nath Radhey Shyam and Co. and another (1). The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 1974, (Bill No. 27 of 1974) as introduced in the Parliament was considered by the Delhi High Court and it was held in paras 18,19 and 20 thus:
``18. After this report of the Joint Committee, we find that the proposed Rule 1 A was
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.