JUDGMENT :

1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendant-appellant against the judgement and decree dated 1.8.2006, passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Bareilly in Civil Appeal No. 222 of 1998 arising out of O.S. No. 203 of 1988 from the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bareilly.

2. In this appeal the following substantial questions of law were framed:

“A. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the trial court was justified in striking off the defence of the defendant under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC?

B. Whether by a composite order the court could have struck off the defence under Order 15 Rule 5 CPC and simultaneously decree the suit either under Order 15 Rule 1 or Order 12 Rule 6 CPC?

C. Whether after framing as many as 13 contentious issues including the availability of the protection of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 to the defendant, as well as the jurisdiction of the court, the courts were justified in law by taking recourse to the provisions of Order 15 Rule 1 and Order 12 Rule 6 CPC for decreeing the suit without recording of evidence?

D. Whether it is permissible for the court to rely on an alleged admission made in the written statemen