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

2007 Supreme(Raj) 852

Rajasthan High Court
Honble PRAKASH TATIA, J.
Daula Ram - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Sajjan Kanwar - Respondents
S.B.Civil Revision Petition No.324 of 2006
Decided On : May 31, 2007

Advocates Appeared:
R. Choudhary for Mr.S Srimali, for Petitioner D.K. Sharma for H. Maheshwari, for Respondent

Headnote:C.P.C., Order 37 Rule 3 and 4 – Dismissal of application for setting aside exparte decree on the ground of non-disclosure of reasons for his absence or his not filing defence within 10 days from the date of service of summons u/O. 37 R. 3 CPC – Held – The defendant (petitioner) misled by the language used in the Form No. 4A prescribed by CPC itself, therefore, he could not submit his application for leave to defend within prescribed limit u/O. 37 R. 3 CPC so the decree deserves to be set aside – Granted liberty to file application for leave to defend within 10 days. (Paras 12 to 14)

       

Honble TATIA, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2). The petitioner/defendant is aggrieved against the order dated 29.8.2005 by which the trial court dismissed the petitioners application filed under Order 37 Rule 4 CPC for setting aside the decree passed under Clause (a) of Sub-rule (6) of Rule 3 of Order 37 CPC as the petitioner/defendant did not sought leave to defend the suit within a period of 10 days as required by Sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 of Order 37 CPC.

(3). Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the certified copy of summon in Form No.4A issued by the trial court under Order 37 Rule 3 CPC and submitted that he received the summon wherein it is clearly mentioned that the defendant is to attend the Court on 24.7.2004. The petitioner/defendant was sick on 24.7.2004 and, therefore, court not appear in Court on 24.7.2004. On 24.7.2004, the trial court passed the money decree against the petitioner/defendant. The next day was Sunday, therefore, the petitioner submitted application for setting aside the ex-parte decree on 26.7.2004. That application was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that the petitioner was supposed to submit his leave to defence within ten (10) days form the date of service of summons upon him and, therefore, the plea of the petitioner that he was sick on 24.7.2004 was irrelevant. The trial court for this reason dismissed the petitioner/defendants application for setting aside the decree as no cause has been shown by the petitioner/defendant for his not submitting application for leave to defend the suit under Sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 of Order 37 CPC.

(4). I perused the provisions contained in Order 37 CPC as well as Forms no.4 and 4A prescribed in Appendix-B attached to Civil Procedure Code. Form No.4 is required to be served upon the defendant as provided under Order 37 Rule 2(2) CPC whereas the summon for judgment as prescribed in Form No.4A is required to be served upon the defendant under Order 37 Rule 3(4) CPC. There is a lot of difference in the language used in Forms No.4 and 4A. Forms No.4 and 4A prescribed in Appendix-B are reproduced as under :-

"No.4

SUMMONS IN A SUMMARY SUIT

(O.XXXVII, r.2)

(Title)

To _____ (Name, description and place of residence)

"WHEREAS _________ has instituted a suit against you under Order XXXVII, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for Rs.________ and interest, you are hereby summoned to cause an appearance to be entered for you, within ten days from the service hereof, in default whereof the plaintiff will be entitled, after the expiration of the said period of ten days, to obtain a decree for any sum not exceeding the sum of Rs.________ 4 and the sum of Rs._____ for costs, together with such interest, if any, as the Court may order.

If you cause an appearance to be entered for you, ____the plaintiff will thereafter serve upon you a summons for judgment at the hearing of which you will be entitled to move the Court for leave to defend the suit. Leave to defend may be obtained if you satisfy the court by affidavit or otherwise that there is a defence to the suit on the merits or that it is reasonable that you should be allowed to defend. GIVEN under my hand and the seal of the court, this _____ day of ______ 19___/20___.

Judge"

"No.4A

SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT IN A SUMMARY SUIT

(O.XXXVII, r.3)

(Title)

In the ________ Court, at ________ Suit NO._____ of 19___/20___. XYZ ––––––––––––––– Plaintiff vs. ABC ___ Defendant

"Upon reading the affidavit of the plaintiff the Court makes the following order, namely :-

Let all parties concerned attend the Court or Judge, as the case may be, on the ________ day of _________ 19___/20___, 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.________ and for interest and costs. Dated the _____ day of ______ 19___/20___."

(5). From a perusal of Form No.4, it is clear tha













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 Back to top