Written arguments should be submitted before the conclusion of oral arguments with the express permission of the Court, as per the provisions of Order XVIII, Rules 3(A) to 3(D) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity the Code) challenges order dated 29.4.2003 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Ferozepur directing that the application filed by the petitioner-appellant for placing on record the written arguments be returned to the learned counsel for presenting the same after the oral submissions have been made. The hearing of the appeal was adjourned to 16.5.2003.

2. Petitioner-appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 1.6.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ferozepur whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff appellant being Civil Suit No. 149-I of 22.7.1992 was dismissed. It has been argued in this petition that earlier also written arguments were submitted before the learned District Judge but he did not entertain the same and eventually the application was filed on which the impugned order dated 29.4.2003 was passed. The order passed by the Addl. District Judge reads as under:

"Heard. The appellant has filed an application that permission be granted to him to submit written arguments. As per Order 18 Rule 2(3A) any party may address oral arguments in a case and shall before the conclusion of the oral arguments if any submit, if the Court so permits, concisely and under distinct heading, written arguments in support of his case to the Court. Therefore, this application is ordered to be returned to the counsel for the appellant for presenting the same after, advancing oral arguments. I am to attend the meeting, so the appeal is adjourned to 16.5.2003."

3. Shri B.R. Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant has argued that the order passed by the Addl. District Judge is, in utter disregard and violation of Order XVIII Rules 3(A), 3(B), 3(C) and D of the Code. According to the learned counsel there is no element of compulsion in the afore-mentioned provision to first address oral arguments before submitting arguments in writing. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that the learned Addl. District Judge be directed to entertain the written statements and place its copy on record.

4. I have thoughtfully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and do not find any merit in the same. In fact this petition is a vexatious piece of litigation. The provisions of Order XVIII, Rules 3(A), 3(B), 3(C) and 3(D) of the Code reads as under:

3(A) Any party may address oral arguments in a case, and shall, before he concludes the oral arguments, if any, submit if the Court so permits concisely and under distinct headings written arguments in support of his case to the Court and such written arguments shall form part of the record,

(3B) A copy of such written arguments shall be simultaneously furnished to the opposite party.

(3C) No adjournment shall be granted for the purpose of filing the written arguments unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing considers it necessary to grant such adjournment.

(3D) The Court shall fix such time limits for the oral arguments by either of the parties in a case, as it thinks fit."

A perusal of the above provisions shows that if any written arguments are to be submitted then the shall be done before concluding oral arguments and that too with the express permission of the Court. If the written arguments are presented before the conclusion of oral arguments then the Court may permit such arguments to be taken on record and the same shall form part of the record. Copy of such written argument is required to be furnished to the counsel opposite. No adjournment could be granted to a" party for presenting written arguments unless the Court for the reasons to be recorded in writing considers it necessary to grant such adjournment. Therefore, it is evident that written arguments are to be presented before the conclusion of oral arguments and that too with the express permission in writing of the Court. There is no room to read a provision in the afor