Back
2006 (1) JLJ 135
(SUPREME COURT)
Y.K. Sabharwal, D.M. Dharmadhikari and Tarun Chatterjee, JJ.
Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu v. Union of India
Writ Petitions (Civil) No. 496 and 570 of 2002;
Decided on 2.8.2005.
(2) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.18 R. 4 (amended) -- chief examination in affidavit and cross-examination before Commissioner -- Legislature has validly amended the provision which has been upheld in previous case 2003 (l) JLJ 171 = 2002 (2) BU 263 (SC) -- in complex cases, Court may decline examination in-chief before Commissioner -- under certain circumstances, Commissioner may remark on demeanour of witnesses. [Paras 5 & 7
(3) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.18 R. 4 and O.26 Rr. 4A & 15 -- recording of evidence by Commissioner – training for the purpose -- is a good practice -- expenses towards fee payable to Commissioner --likely to be much less than the expenditure incurred by parties to attend Courts on various dates to record evidence. [Para 6
(4) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.18 Rr. 5(a), 5 (b) (as amended in 1976), 4(3) and 19 (as amended and inserted in 1999 and 2002) -- as per amendment of 1976. in all appealable cases, evidence had to be recorded by Court -after insertion of R. 19 containing non-obstinate clause in O.18, even in appealable cases Commissioner can record evidence. [Paras 7 to 9
(5) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.26 R. 4A (as inserted in 1999) and O.18 Rr. 19, 5(a) & 5(b) -- power to issue commission under O.26 R. 4A, and O.18 R. 19 overrides provisions under O.18 Rr. 5(a) and 5(b) -- hence there is no conflict. [Para 10
(6) Civil P.c., 1908 -- O.18 Rr. 4(4) & 4(8) and O.26 Rr. 16, 16A. 17 & 18-- evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 154 -- all objections noted by Commissioner will be decided by Court -- objection as to the declaration of hostile witnesses -- permission of Court will have to be taken -- Court may even withdraw commission to record remaining evidence itself -- it may impose avy costs on concerned party on finding that permission was sought to delay progress or to harass opposite party. [Paras 11 & 12
(7) Documents -- in possession of Commissioner -- to ensure safe custody, necessary rules, regulations may be framed or practice, directions may be issued by the High Court. [Para 13
(8) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.18 R, 17 A – deletion of provision -- does not disentitle production of additional evidence -- Court may permit leading of such evidence at a later stage on such terms as may appear to be just, [Para 14
(9) Civil P.C., 1908 – O.8 R1 (as amended in 1999 and 2002) –limitation for fjling of written statement was 30 days after service -- rigour was reduced to 90 days in amendment of 2002. [Para 15
(10) Interpretation of Statutes -- provision is mandatory or directory -- depends upon facts of each case -- object of statute is determining factor, AIR 1965 se 895, AIR 1955 SC 425 and (2002) 6 SCC 33 relied on. [Paras 18 to 21
(11) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.8 Rr. 1, 9 & 10 -- provision under 0.8 R. 1 -- fixing upper limit 90 days for filing written statement is directory -Court has discretion to allow filing of written statement even after the period of 90 days has expired. [Para 22
(12) Civil P.C., 1908 -- Ss. 39 & 39 (4) (c) : inserted in 2002), O.21 R.3 and 0.21 R. 48 -- S, 39 does not authorize Court to execute decree outside its jurisdiction -- it does not dilute other provisions such as O.21 R. 3 or R. 48 which provide differently. [Para 25
(13) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 64(1) and S. 64(2) (as inserted in 2002) -- S. 64(2) protects claims which are prohibited under S. 64(1) -- rider of claim -- contract should be registered prior to attachment under S. 64(1) -- there is no ambiguity in S. 64(2). [Para 26
(14) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.6 R. 17 (as delected and restored in 1999 and 2002) -- proviso as inserted -- curtails absolute discretion to allow amendment at any stage -- object is to prevent frivolous applications to prevent delay in trial. [Para 27,
(15) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.5 Rr. 9, 9(3), 9A & 9(5) -- service by party or by courier -- there cannot be any valid objection -- High Court can make appropriate rules and regulations or issue practice directions to ensure provisions are not abused to obtain false endorsements. [Para 29
(16) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.17 R, 1 proviso and R. 2 proviso -- after three adjournments, further adjournments may be granted on showing circumstances beyond control of party -- costs may also be awarded. [Paras 32 & 33
(17) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 18 R. 2(4) (as delected in 1999) and S. 151 -- deletion does not take away inherent power of Court to call any witness at any stage -- amendment is of no consequence. [Para 33
(18) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.18 R. 2 (3A) to (3D) (as inserted in 2002) - object of filing written arguments or fixing time limit for oral arguments -- is to save time of Court. [Par
(19) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.7 R. 14(4) -- words ‘plaintiff‘s witnesses‘-are due to mistake of Legislature -- they should be ‘defendant‘ witnesses -they should be so read till corrected by Legislature. [Paras 36 & 37
(20) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 35 (2) -- provision for costs to follow the event -- it is implicit that costs have to be those which are reasonably incurred by successful party except ill those cases where Court may direct otherwise. [Para 39
(21) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 80 -- provision -- similar provisions under other enactments --conditions precedent of notice before filing suit against Central or State Government and statutory authorities --all such notices should be replied with full particulars within stipulated period -- else heavy costs to be imposed. [Paras 40 & 41
(22) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 115 (as amended in 2002) --Constitution of India -- Arts. 226 and 227 -- power of High Court under Arts. 226 and 227 -- is always in addition to revisional jurisdiction -- curtailment of revisional juridiction does not take away Constitutional jurisdiction. 2004(1) JLJ I (SC) relied on. [Para 44
(23) Civil P.C., 1908 -- Ss. 148 and 151 --maximum extension of 30 days‘ time as allowed by S. 148 –may further be extended under inherent powers in suitable cases. AIR 1961 SC 882 relied on. [Paras 45 & 46
(24) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.9 R.5 -- period of 7 days -- is clearly directory. [Para 48
(25) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.11 R.15 (as amended) -- inspection of documents at or before the settlement of issues -- provision is directory in nature --it does not mean that the inspection cannot be allowed differ settlement of issues. [Para 49
(26) Constitution of India -- Arts. 247 and 246, Seventh Schedule, Lists / and /Il -- Courts below the High Court -- deal mostly with cases of central laws -- expenditure etc. to be borne by Central Government -suggestions of Constitution Review Committee directed TO be examined by Central Government and report required to be submitted within four months. [Paras 51 to 54
(27) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S.89 and O.10 R. 1A --use of word ‘shall‘ and word ‘may‘ in section 89 -- use of word ‘may‘ ill O. 10 R. 1A -- on harmonious construction, it becomes clear that use of word ‘ma)" in S. 89 governs only The aspect of re-formation of the terms of possible settlement. [Para 59
(28) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -- S.8 -- Civil P. C. 1908 -- S.89 and O.10 R.1 A-- provisions of the Act apply when case is referred for arbitration or conciliation -- ACT does not contemplate Court asking parties to choose alternative dispute resolution, including arbitration, and the parties choosing arbitration, as in S. 89, CPC (2000) 4 SCC 539 relied on. [Para 60
(29) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S.89 and O.10 Rr: 1A. IB & IC Part Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -- S. 8 n High Court can Fame rules under Part X. CPC for purposes of S. 89 and O. 10 Rr. 1A. I B & I C. CPC -- provisions of the Act come into force after dispute is referred to conciliation. [Para 60
(30) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S. 89(2) (d)--decree by Court to be passed after mediation succeeds and parties agree to the terms of settlement. [Para 61
(31) Civil P.C., 1908 -- S.89(2) -- alternative dispute resolution -contemplated rules apply to dispute arising under Family Courts Act. [Para 64
(32) Civil P.C., 1908 -- Part X. Ss. 121 to 131 and 89-- draft rules of Alternative Dispute Resolution – duly framed by the Committee -- circulated to all concerned before finalisation -- High Courts to take appropriate steps to make rules. [Para 68
¼1½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 26 ¼2½ rFkk vk- 6 fu- 15 ¼4½ ¼la‘kksf/kr½& &vfHkopu dk lR;kiu djrs gq, ‘kiFki= Qkby fd, tkus dh vis{kk& &vfHkopu esa dfFkr rF;ksa dh lR;rk ds ckjs esa vfHklk{kh ij Mkyh xbZ vfrfjDr ftEesnkj gS& &;g lk{; ugha gS& &vfHkopu esa la‘kks/ku djus ij mlds leFkZu esa u, fljs ls ‘kiFki= Qkby fd;k tk,xkA ¼iSjk 4½
¼2½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 18 fu- 4 ¼la‘kksf/kr½& &eq[; ijh{kk ‘kiFki= esa rFkk çfrijh{kk dfe‘kuj ds le{k& &fo/kku eaMy us mica/k fof/kekU;r% la‘kksf/kr fd;k gS ftls iwoZru ekeyk 2003¼1½ ts ,y ts 171&2002¼2½ ch ,y ts 263 ¼mPpre U;k-½ esa ekU; Bgjk;k x;k gS& &tfVy ekeyksa esa U;k;ky;] eq[; ijh{kk dfe‘uj ds le{k fd, tkus ls badkj dj ldrk gS& &dfri ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa dfe‘uj lkf{k;ksa dh HkkoHkaxh ij fVIi.kh dj ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 5½
¼3½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk-18 fu-4 rFkk vk- 26 fu-4d ,oa 15& &dfe‘uj }kjk lk{; dk vfHkys[k& &bl ç;kstu ds fy, ijh{k.k& &vPNh çFkk gSa& &dfe‘uj dks lans; Qhl ds fy, [kpZ& &i{kdkjksa }kjk lk{; vfHkfyf[kr djkus ds fy, fofHkUu rkjh[kksa dks U;k;ky;ksa esa gkftj gksus ds fy, O;ixr O;; ls laHkor% dgha de gSA ¼iSjk 6½
¼4½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk-18 fu-5 ¼d½ ,oa 5 ¼[k½ ¼lu~ 1976 esa ;Fkkla‘kksf/kr]½ 4 ¼3½ rFkk 19 ¼lu~ 1999 vkSj 2002 esa ;Fkk la‘kksf/kr vkSj var%LFkkfir½& lu~ 1976 ds la‘kks/ku ds vuqlkj leLr vihyuh; ekeyksa esa lk{; U;k;ky; }kjk vfHkfyf[kr fd;k x;k tkuk vko‘;d Fkk& &vk- 18 esa fu- 19 ds var%LFkkiu ds i‘pkr] ftlesa loksZifj [kaM varfoZ"V gS] vihyuh; ekeyksa esa Hkh dfe‘uj lk{; vfHkfyf[kr dj ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 7 ls 9½
¼5½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 26 fu-4d ¼lu~ 1999 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½ rFkk vk- 18 fu- 19] 5 ¼d½ ,oa 5 ¼[k½& &vk- 26 fu-4 d rFkk vk- 18 fu- 19 ds v/khu deh‘ku fudkyus dh ‘kfDr vk- 18 fu-5 ¼d½ ,oa 5 ¼[k½ ij v/;kjksgh gS& &blfy, ijLij fojks/k ugha gSA ¼iSjk 10½
¼6½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 18 fu- 4¼4½ ,oa 4¼8½ rFkk vk- 26 fu- 16] 16d] 17 ,oa 18& &lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872& &/kkjk 154& &dfe‘uj }kjk uksV dh xbZ leLr vkifRrÙk;k¡ U;k;ky; }kjk fofuf‘pr dh tk,xh& &i{knzksgh lkf{k;kas dh ?kks"k.kk ds laca/k esa vkifRrÙk;k¡& &Uk;ky; dh vuqKk yh tkuk gksxh& &Uk;ky; ‘ks"k lk{; Lo;a vfHkfyf[kr djus ls fy, deh‘ku okil Hkh ys ldrk gS& &;g fu"d"kZ fudyus ij fd vuqKk dks bZIlk çxfr esa foyac ds fy, ;k fojks/kh i{kdkj dks rax djus ds fy, dh xbZ Fkh] laca) i{kdkj ij Hkkjh [kpZ vf/kjksfir dj ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 11 ,oa 12½
¼7½ nLrkost& &dfe‘uj ds dCts eas& &lqjf{kr vfHkj{kk lqfuf‘pr djus ds fy, mPp U;k;ky; }kjk vko‘;d fu;e] fofu;e fojfpr fd, tk ldrs gSa ;k çFkk funsZ‘k tkjh fd, tk ldrs gSaA ¼iSjk 13½
¼8½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 18 fu-17d& &mica/k gVk, tkus ls& &vfrfjDr lk{; is‘k djus ls fugZfdr ugha& &Uk;ky; ,slk lk{; ijorhZ çØe ij ,sls fuca/kuksa ds v/khu tks _tq çrhr gksa] is‘k djus dh vuqKk ns ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 14½
¼9½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 8 fu-1 ¼lu~ 1999 vkSj 2002 esa ;Fkk la‘kksf/kr½& &fyf[kr dFku Qkby djus ds fy, ifjlhek rkehy ds i‘pkr 30 fnu Fkh& &lu~ 2002 ds la‘kks/ku }kjk ;g dM+kbZ de dj 90 fnu dj nh xbZA ¼iSjk 15½
¼10½ fof/k dk fuoZpu& &mica/k vkKkid gS ;k funs‘kkRed& &çR;sd ekeys ds rF;ksa ij fuHkZj gksrk gS& &dkuwu dk mís‘; fu‘pk;d dkjd gksrk gSA , vkb vkj 1965 ,l lh 895] , vkb vkj 1955 ,l lh 425 rFkk ¼2002½ 6 ,l lh lh 33 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 18 ls 21½
¼11½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 8 fu-1] 9 ,oa 10& &vk-8 fu- 1 ds v/khu mica/k& &fyf[kr dFku Qkby djus ds fy, fu;r 90 fnu dh vf/kdre lhek& &funs‘kkRed gSa& &Uk;ky; dks 90 fnu dh vof/k ds volku ds i‘pkr Hkh fyf[kr dFku Qkby djus dh vuqKk nsus dk foosdkf/kdkj gSA ¼iSjk 22½
¼12½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 39] 39¼4½ ¼lu~ 2002 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½] vk- 21 fu- 3 rFkk vk- 21 fu-48& &/kkjk 39 esa U;k;ky; dks viuh vf/kdkfjrk ds ckgj fMØh fu"ikfnr djus dh vuqKk ugha nh xbZ gS& &mlls vk- 21 fu-3 ;k fu- 48 tSls vU; mica/k] ftuesa vU;Fkk micaf/kr gS] ruqdr ugha gksrsA ¼iSjk 25½
¼13½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 64¼1½ rFkk 64¼2½ ¼lu~ 2002 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½& &/kkjk 64¼2½ esa og nkos lajf{kr gS tks /kkjk 64¼1½ v/khu çfrf"k) gSa& &nkos dh mifjdk& &/kkjk 64¼1½ ds v/khu dqdhZ ds iwoZ lafonk jftLVªhÑr gksuk pkfg,& &/kkjk 64 ¼2½ esa lafnX/kkFkZdrk ugha gSA ¼iSjk 26½
¼14½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 6 fu- 17 ¼lu~ 1999 rFkk lu~ 2002 esa ;Fkk foyqIr rFkk çR;kofrZr½& &;Fkk var%LFkkfir ijarqd& &fdlh Hkh çØe ij la‘kks/ku vuqKkr djus dk vkR;afrd foosdkf/kdkj de fd;k x;k gS& &mís‘; gS fopkj.k esa foyac ds fuokj.k ds fy, rqPN vkosnu jksdukA ¼iSjk 27½
¼15½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk-5 fu-9] 9¼3½] 9d ,oa 9¼5½& &i{kdkj }kjk ;k dwfj;j }kjk rkehy& &fof/kekU; vkifRrÙk ugha gks ldrh& &mPp U;k;ky; ;g lqfuf‘pr djus ds fy, fd feF;k i`"Bkadu vfHkçkIr djus ds fy, mica/kksa dk nq#i;ksx ugha gks] leqfpr fu;e vkSj fofu;e cuk ldrk gS ;k çFkk funs‘k tkjh dj ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 29½
¼16½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk-17 fu-1 ijarqd ,oa fu- 2 ijarqd& &rhu ds i‘pkr vkSj LFkxu i{kdkj ds fu;a=.k ls ijs ifjfLFkfr;k¡ n‘kkZus ij çnku fd;k tk ldrk gSa& &[kpZ Hkh vf/kfu.khZr fd;k tk ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 32 ,oa 33½
¼17½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 18 fu-2¼4½ ¼lu~ 1999 esa ;Fkk foyqIr½ rFkk /kkjk 151& &mica/k gVk, tkus ls fdlh Hkh çØe ij fdlh Hkh lk{kh dks cqykus dh U;k;ky; dh varfuZfgr ‘kfDr ugha tkrh& &la‘kks/ku egRoghu gSA ¼iSjk 33½
¼18½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 18 fu- 2¼3d½ ls ¼3?k½ ¼lu~ 2002 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½& &fyf[kr cgl Qkby djus ;k ekSf[kd cgl ds fy, le; fu;r djus dk mís‘;& &Uk;ky; ds le; dh cpr gSA ¼iSjk 34½
¼19½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 7 fu- 14¼4½& &‘‘kCn ^oknh ds lkf{k;ksa*& &fo/kku&eaMy dh Hkwyo‘k gSa& &^çfroknh ds lkf{k;ksa* gksuk pkfg,& &fo/kku&eaMy }kjk lgh fd, tkus rd bUgsa blh çdkj i<+k tkuk pkfg,A ¼iSjk 36 ,oa 37½
¼20½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 35¼2½& &[kpsZ ifj.kke ds vuqlkj fn, tkus dk mica/k& &foof{kr gS fd [kpZ ogh gksaxs tks] mu ekeyksa ds flok; tgk¡ U;k;ky; vU;Fkk funs‘k djs] lQy i{kdkj }kjk ;qfDr;qDr mixr gSA ¼iSjk 39½
¼21½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 80& &mica/k& &vU vf/kfu;fefr;ksa ds v/khu le:i mica/k& &dsanzh ;k jkT; ljdkj vkSj dkuwuh çkf/kdkfj;ksa ds fo#) okn Qkby djus ls iwoZ lwpuk dh iwoZ‘krZ& &,slh leLr lwpukvksa dk mÙkj laiw.kZ fof‘kf"V;ksa lfgr] vuqc) le; ds Hkhrj fn;k tkuk pkfg,& &vUFkk Hkkjh [kpZ vf/kjksfir fd;k tk,A ¼iSjk 40 ,oa 41½
¼22½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 115 ¼lu~ 2002 esa ;Fkk la‘kksf/kr½& &Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq- 226 rFkk 227& &vuq- 226 vkSj 227 ds v/khu mPp U;k;ky; dh ‘kfDr& &lnSo iqujh{k.k vf/kdkfjrk ds vfrfjDr gksrh gSa& &iqujh{k.k vf/kdkfjrk de djus ls lkafo/kkfud vf/kdkfjrk ugha tkrhA 2004 ¼1½ ts ,y ts 1 ¼mPpre U;k-½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 44½
¼23½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 148 rFkk 151& &vf/kdre 30 fnu dk le; /kkjk 148 }kjk ;Fkk vuqKkr c<+k;k tkuk& &miqDr ekeyksa esa varfuZfgr ‘kDR;k/khu vkSj c<+k;k tk ldrk gSA , vkb vkj 1961 ,l lh 882 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 45 ,oa 46½
¼24½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 9 fu-5& &lkr fnu dh vof/k& &Li"Vr% funs‘kkRed gSA ¼iSjk 48½
¼25½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk- 11 fu- 15 ¼;Fkk la‘kksf/kr½& &fook|dksa ds fLFkjhdj.k ds le; ;k mlds iwoZ nLrkostksa dk fujh{k.k& &mica/k funs‘kkRed çÑfr dk gS& &bldk vFkZ ;g ugha gS fd okn ds fuLrkj.k ds i‘pkr fujh{k.k vuqKkr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼iSjk 49½
¼26½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq- 247 rFkk 246] lkroha vuqlwph] lwph 1 rFkk 3& &mPp U;k;ky; ls fupys U;k;ky;& &vf/kdrj dsanzh; fof/k ds ekeyksa ij fopkj djrs gSa& &O; vkfn dsanzh; ljdkj }kjk ogu fd;k tkuk pkfg,& &lafo/kku iqujh{k.k lfefr ds lq>koksa dk dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk voyksdu fd, tkus dk funs‘k fn;k x;k vkSj pkj ekl ds Hkhrj fjiksVZ fn, tkus dh vis{kk dh xbZA ¼iSjk 51 ls 54½
¼27½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 89 rFkk vk- 10 fu- 1d& &/kkjk 89 esa ‘‘kCn ^djsxk* rFkk ‘‘kCn ^djsxk* ¼dj ldsxk½ dk ç;ksx& &vk-10 fu-1 d esa ‘‘kCn ^nsxk* dk ç;ksx& &lkeatLiw.kZ vFkkZUo;u djus ij Li"V gks tkrk gS fd /kkjk 89 esa ‘‘kCn ^djsxk* ¼dj ldsxk½ ds ç;ksx ls dsoy laHkkO; fuiVkjs ds fuca/ku iqu%fuf‘pr fd, tkus dk igyw fofu;fer gksrk gSA ¼iSjk 59½
¼28½ ek/;LFke vkSj lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996& &/kkjk 8& &flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 89 rFkk vk- 10 fu- 1d& &ekeyk ek/;LFke ;k lqyg ds fy, fufnZ"V fd;k x;k gks rc vf/kfu;e ds mica/k ykxw gksrs gSa& &vf/kfu;e esa lafgrk dh /kkjk 89 dh Hkk¡fr] U;k;ky; }kjk i{kdkjksa ls ek/;LFke lfgr dksbZ&u&dksbZ oSdfYid fookn dk lek/kku pquus dks dgk tkuk rFkk i{kdkjksa }kjk ek/;LFke~ pquk tkuk vuq/;kr ughaA ¼2004½4 ,l lh lh 539 voyafcrA
¼29½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 89] 10 fu- 1d] 1[k ,oa 1x] Hkkx 10& &ek/;LFke vkSj lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996& &/kkjk 8& &mPp U;k;ky; lafgrk dh /kkjk 89 rFkk vk-10 fu-1 d] 1 [k ,oa 1x ds ç;kstuksa ds fy, lafgrk ds Hkkx 10 ds v/khu fu;e fojfpr dj ldrk gSa& &vf/kfu;e ds mica/k lqyg ds fy, fookn fufnZ"V fd, tkus ds i‘pkr ço`Ùk gksrs gSaA ¼iSjk 60½
¼30½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 89¼2½ ¼?k½& &Uk;ky; }kjk fMØh e/;LFkrk lQy gks tkus rFkk i{kdkjksa ds le>kSrs ds fuca/kuksa ij lger gks tkus ds i‘pkr ikfjr dh tkuh gksrh gSA ¼iSjk 61½
¼31½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 89¼2½& &oSdfYid fookn dk lek/kku& &vuq/;kr fu;e& &dqVqac U;k;ky; vf/kfu;e ds v/khu mn~Hkwr fookn dks ykxw gksrs gSaA ¼iSjk 64½
¼32½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &Hkkx 10] /kkjk 121 ls 131 rFkk 89& &oSdfYid fookn ds lek/kku ds çk:i fu;e& &lfefr }kjk lE;d:is.k fojfpr & &vafre :i fn, tkus ls iwoZ] lacaf/kr lHkh dks ifjpkfyr& &mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fu;e cukus ds fy, mi;qDr dne mBk, tk,¡A ¼68½
Sabharwal, J.--1. The challenge made to the Constitutional validity of amendments made to the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code") by Amendment Acts of 1999 and 2002 was rejected by the Court (Salem Advocates Bar Association, Tamil Nadu P. Union of India [2003 (1) JLJ 171 = 2002 (2) BLJ 263 = (2003) I SCC 49], but it was noticed in the judgment that modalities have to be formulated for the manner in which section 89 of the Code, and for that matter, the other provisions which have been introduced by way of amendments, may have to be operated. For this purpose, a Committee headed by a former Judge of this Court and Chairman, Law Commission of India (Justice M. Jagannadha Rao), was constituted so as to ensure that the amendments become effective and result in quicker dispensation of justice. It was further observed that the Committee may consider devising a model case management formula as well as rules and regulations which should be followed while taking recourse to the Alternate. Disputes Resolution (ADR) referred in section 89. It was also observed that the model rules, with or without modification, which are formulated may be adopted by the High Courts concerned for giving effect to section 89(2)(d) of the Code. Further, it was observed that if any difficulties are felt in the working of the amendments, the same can be placed before the Committee which would consider the same and make. necessary suggestions in its report. The Committee has filed the report.
2. The report is in three parts. Report I contains the consideration of the various grievances relating to amendments to the Code and the recommendations of the Committee. Report 2 contains the consideration of various points raised in connection with draft rules for ADR and mediation as envisaged by section 89 of the Code read with Order X Rules I A, 1 B and I C. It also contains model rules. Report 3 contains a conceptual appraisal of case management. It also contains the model rules of case management.
3. First we will consider Report 1 which deals with the amendments made to the Code.
Report No.1
Amendment inserting sub-section (2) to section 26 and Rule 15(4) to Order VI Rule 15.
4. Prior to insertion of aforesaid provisions, there was no requirement of filing affidavit with the pleadings. These provisions now require the plaint to be accompanied by an affidavit as provided in section 26(2) and the person verifying the pleadings to furnish an affidavit in support of the pleading [Order VI Rule 15(4)]. It was sought to be contended that requirement of filing an affidavit is illegal and unnecessary in view of the existing requirement of verification of the pleadings. We arc unable to agree. The affidavit required to be filed under amended section 26(2) and Order VI Rule 15(4) of the Code has the effect of fixing additional responsibility on the deponent 'as to the truth of the facts stated in the pleadings. It is, however, made clear that such an affidavit would not be evidence for the purpose of the trial. Further, on amendment of the pleadings, a fresh affidavit shall have to be filed in consonance thereof.
Amendment of Order XVIII Rule 4
5. The amendment provides that in every case, the examination-in chief of a witness shall be on affidavit. The Court has already been vested with power to permit affidavits to be filed as evidence as provided in Order XIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code. It has to be kept in view that the right of cross-examination and re-examination in open Court has not been disturbed by Order XVIII Rule 4 inserted by amendment. It is true that after the amendment, cross-examination can be before a Commissioner but we feel that no exception can be taken in regard to the power of the Legislature to amend the Code and provide for the examination-in-chief to be on affidavit or cross-examination before a Commissioner. The scope of Order XVII Rule 4 has been examined and its validity upheld in Salem Advocates Bar Association case (supra). The
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
