ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Firm Kripa Ram Chanan Ram - Appellant
Versus
Firm Jawahir Lal Narsingh Das - Respondent
Decided On : 13-07-1928
JUDGMENT
Dalal, J. - It is correct of the defendant applicant to say that the trial Court was not justified in striking out the defence under Order XI, Rule 21. The Court directed production of bahi khaias by the defendant, and the bahikhatas were not produced. This order could not have been passed under Rule 15, because the defendant himself had not made any reference to any bahi khata in his pleadings or affidavits. The order could have been made only under Rule 14, and a Bench of this Court in The Lyalpur Sugar Mills and Co. and Another Vs. The Ram Chandra Gur Sahai Cotton Mills and Co., AIR 1922 All 235 has held that non-compliance with an order served on a defendant for the production only of documents under Rule 14, of Order XI, of the CPC does not warrant the striking out of the defence under Rule 21. Rule 21 applies only where a party fails to answer interrogatories or to comply with an order for discovery or inspection of documents. Rule 14 refers to production of documents, and not to inspection or discovery.
2. I set aside the decree of the lower Court dated 11th April, 1928, and direct that Court to re-try the case after giving the defendant an opportunity to file his defence. Costs here and heretofore shall abide the result.
The Lyalpur Sugar Mills and Co. and Another Vs. The Ram Chandra Gur Sahai Cotton Mills and Co.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.