DWIVEDI AND VERMA, JJ.

( 1 ) THE several questions referred for decision to this Bench require substantially answers to two questions, namely,-

(i) the comparative scope of Rules 2 and 3 of Order 17 of the Code of civil Procedure, and

(ii) the meaning of word 'appear' occurring in Rule 2, Order 17, C. P. C, to constitute appearance of a party at the hearing. The answers to these questions would provide in turn the answers to the several questions referred to us for decision. For this reason we shall proceed to first consider the two main questions already stated. This reference to a larger bench is apparently made by my Lord the Chief Justice on account of the fact that a recent decision in Shantabai v. Chokhe-lal, 1975 MPLJ 832 : (AIR 1976 madh Pra 21) (FB) by a Bench of three learned Judges takes the view that Rule 3 of Order 17 applies even in the absence of parties when ever since the year 1930, the authoritative view of this Court was to the contrary and the questions involved are of frequent occurrence in the subordinate Courts.

( 2 ) THE first question is with regard to the comparative scope of Rules 2 and 3 of order 17 which read as under:-

"2. Procedure if parties fail to app

Click Here to Read the rest of this document