S.1 Short title and commencement

       (1) This Act may be called the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999.
       (2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint, and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act and for different States or for different parts thereof.

S.2 Amendment of section 26

       In the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), existing section 26 shall be renumbered as sub-section (1), and after sub-section (1) as so renumbered, the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:--
       "(2) In every plaint, facts shall be proved by affidavit.".

S.3 Amendment of section 27

       In section 27 of the principal Act, the following words shall be inserted at the end, namely:--
       "on such day not beyond thirty days from date of the institution of the suit".

S.4 Amendment of section 32

In section 32 of the principal Act, in clause (c) for the words "not exceeding five hundred rupees" the words "not exceeding five thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

S.5 Amendment of section 58

       In section 58 of the principal Act,--
       (i) in sub-section (1),--
       (a) in clause (a), for the words "one thousand rupees", the words "five thousand rupees" shall be substituted;
       (b) for clause (b), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:--
       "(b) where the decree is for the payment of a sum of money exceeding two thousand rupees, but not exceeding five thousand rupees, for a period not exceeding six weeks:";
       (ii) in sub-section (1A), for the words "five hundred rupees", the words "two thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

S.6 Amendment of section 60

       In section 60 of the principal Act, in the first proviso to sub-section (1), in clause (i), for the words "four hundred rupees", the words "one thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

S.7 Insertion of new section 89

       In the principal Act, after section 88, the following section shall be inserted, namely:--
       "89. Settlement of disputes outside the Court.--(1) Where it appears to the Court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the Court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations and after receiving the observations of the parties, the Court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for--
       (a) arbitration;
       (b) conciliation;
       (c) judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat; or
       (d) mediation.
       (2) Where a dispute has been referred--
  

S.8 Amendment of section 95

In section 95 of the principal Act, in subsection (1), for the words "not exceeding one thousand rupees", the words "not exceeding fifty thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

S.9 Amendment of section 96

In section 96 of the principal Act, in subsection (4), for the words "three thousand rupees", the words "ten thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

S.10 Substitution of new section for section 100A

       For section 100A of the principal Act, the following section shall be substituted, namely:--
       "100A. No further appeal in certain cases.--Notwithstanding anything contained in any Letters Patent for any High Court or in any other instrument having the force of law or in any other law for the time being in force,--
       (a) where any appeal from an original or appellate decree or order is heard and decided,
       (b) where any writ, direction or order is issued or made on an application under article 226 or article 227 of the Constitution, by a single Judge of High Court, no further appeal shall lie from the judgment, decision or order of such Single Judge.".

S.11 Substitution of new section for section 102

       For section 102 of the principal Act, the following section shall be substituted, namely.--
       "102. No second appeal in certain cases.--No second appeal shall lie from any decree, when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit does not exceed twenty-Five thousand rupees.".

Legal Commentary on Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1999

Introduction

The Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1999, introduced significant changes to the procedural laws governing civil litigation in India. Among these changes, Section 11, which deals with the principle of res judicata, plays a crucial role in ensuring that issues already decided by a competent court are not re-litigated, thereby promoting judicial efficiency and finality in legal proceedings.

What Section Says

Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code states that no court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter has already been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, and has been decided by a competent court. This principle is aimed at preventing the same issue from being litigated multiple times.

Essential Ingredients

• Direct and Substantial Issue: The matter must have been directly and substantially in issue in the previous suit.
• Same Parties: The parties involved in the current suit must be the same as those in the previous suit.
• Competent Court: The previous suit must have been decided by a court that had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.

Scope of Section

The scope of Section 11 is broad, as it applies to all civil suits and encompasses any matter that could have been raised in the earlier proceedings. It aims to prevent vexatious litigation and conserve judicial resources.

Punishment for Section

While Section 11 itself does not prescribe specific punishments, it serves as a basis for dismissing suits that violate the principle of res judicata. Courts may dismiss such suits at the threshold, thereby preventing unnecessary litigation.

Legal Comments

• Res Judicata - Section 11 embodies the principle of res judicata, which is fundamental to the administration of justice, ensuring that issues are not re-litigated unnecessarily - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Judicial Efficiency - The provision promotes judicial efficiency by preventing the same issues from being litigated multiple times, thus saving court time and resources - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Finality of Judgments - It reinforces the finality of judgments, ensuring that once a matter has been adjudicated, it cannot be reopened without sufficient cause - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Preventing Vexatious Litigation - The section aims to curb vexatious and frivolous litigation, which can burden the judicial system - [ 12. There is no denying the fact that vexatious and useless litigations take considerable part of judicial time].
• Competent Court Requirement - The requirement for a competent court to have decided the previous issue ensures that only valid and authoritative judgments are given effect - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Same Parties Rule - The necessity for the same parties in both suits prevents parties from circumventing the res judicata principle by merely changing the parties involved - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Broad Application - The broad application of Section 11 means it can apply to various civil matters, enhancing its relevance across different legal contexts - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Judicial Discretion - Courts have the discretion to determine whether an issue has been previously adjudicated, which allows for flexibility in applying the law - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Amendment Impact - The 1999 amendment aimed to clarify and strengthen the application of res judicata, reflecting legislative intent to streamline civil procedures - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Legal Certainty - By establishing clear rules regarding re-litigation, Section 11 contributes to legal certainty and predictability in civil proceedings - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Threshold Dismissal - Courts are empowered to dismiss suits at the threshold if they violate the principles of res judicata, thus preventing unnecessary trials - [ 12. There is no denying the fact that vexatious and useless litigations take considerable part of judicial time].
• Facilitating Justice - The overarching goal of Section 11 is to facilitate justice by ensuring that legal disputes are resolved efficiently and conclusively - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Legislative Intent - The legislative intent behind Section 11 is to uphold the integrity of judicial decisions and prevent the waste of judicial resources - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Impact on Future Litigation - The application of Section 11 can significantly impact future litigation strategies, as parties must consider previous judgments when formulating their cases - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Judicial Economy - By limiting the scope for re-litigation, Section 11 promotes judicial economy, allowing courts to focus on new and unresolved issues - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].
• Public Policy Consideration - The principle of res judicata reflects a public policy consideration that seeks to bring finality to disputes and reduce the burden on the judicial system - [ 10 Things to Know About Indian Civil Procedure Code].

S.12 Amendment of section 115

       In section 115 of the principal Act, in sub-section (1),--
       (i) for the proviso, the following proviso shall be substituted, namely:--
       "Provided that the High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where the order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings.";
       (ii) after sub-section (2), but before the Explanation, the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:--
       "(3) A revision shall not operate as a stay Of suit or other proceeding before the Court except where such suit or other proceeding is stayed by the High Court.".

S.13 Amendment of section 148

In section 148 of the principal Act, after the words "such period", the words "not exceeding thirty days in total," shall be inserted.

S.14 Amendment of Order IV

       In the First Schedule to the principal Act (hereinafter referred to as the First Schedule), in Order IV, in rule 1,--
       (i) in sub-rule (1), for the words "plaint to the Court", the words "plaint in duplicate to the Court" shall be substituted;
       (ii) after sub-rule (2), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:--
       "(3) The plaint shall not be deemed to be duly instituted unless it complies with the requirements specified in sub-rules (1) and (2).".

S.15 Amendment of Order V

       In the First Schedule, in Order V,--
       (i) in rule 1, for sub-rule (1), the following shall be substituted, namely:--
       "(1) When a suit has been duly instituted, a summon may be issued to the defendant to appear and answer the claim and to file the written statement of his defence, if any, on such day within thirty days from the day of institution of the suit as may be specified therein:
       Provided that no such summons shall be issued when a defendant has appeared at the presentation of the plaint and admitted the plaintiff's claim:
       Provided further that where the defendant fails to file the written statement on the said day, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day which shall not be beyond thirty days from the date of service of summons o

S.16 Amendment of Order VI

       In the First Schedule, in Order VI,--
       (i) rule 5 shall be omitted;
       (ii) in rule 15, after sub-rule (3), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:--
       "(4) The person verifying the pleading shall also furnish an affidavit in support of his pleadings.";
       (ii) rules 17 and 18 shall be omitted.

S.17 Amendment of Order VII

       In the First Schedule, in Order VII,--
       (i) for rule 9, the following rule shall be substituted, namely:--
       "9. Procedure on admitting plaint.--(1) Where the plaint is admitted, the Court shall give to the plaintiff summons in the name of all the defendants to be served upon or get served in the manner provided under Order V.
       (2) Within two days of the receipt of summons under sub-rule (1), the plaintiff shall send or cause to send the summons to the defendants along-with the copy of the plaint in the manner provided under Order V.
       (3) Where the Court orders that the summons be served on the defendants in the manner provided in rule 9A of Order V, it will direct the plaintiff to present as many copies of the plaint on plain paper as there are defendan

S.18 Amendment of Order VIII

       In the First Schedule, in Order VIII, --
       (i) for rule 1, the following rule shall be substituted, namely: --
       "1. Written statement.--The defendant shall at or before the first hearing or within such time as the Court may permit, which shall not be beyond thirty daysfrom the date of service of summons on the defendant, present a written statement of his defence.";
       (ii) after rule 1 so inserted, the following rule shall be inserted, namely : --
       "1A. Duty of defendant to produce documents upon which relief is claimed or relied upon by him.--(1) Where the defendant bases his defence upon a document or relies upon any document in his possession or power, in support of his defence or claim for set off or counter claim, he shall enter such document in a li

Legal Comments

• "Discretionary extension of time" - Section 18 (Order VIII Rule 1) allows leniency for filing written statements beyond 30 days up to 90 days, when properly explained; court may extend beyond 30 days to prevent miscarriage of justice - [New India Assurance Company Limited VS Surinder Kaur - 2003 0 Supreme(P&H) 735]

• "Written statement beyond 90 days" - Despite amendments, courts can still extend time beyond 90 days where justice requires, as long as delay is explained; outcome depends on facts (e.g., death of signing officer) - [New India Assurance Company Limited VS Surinder Kaur - 2003 0 Supreme(P&H) 735]

• "Case-specific application of Order VIII Rule 1" - The interpretation of Order VIII Rule 1 and the amendments (1999, 2002) turns on preventing miscarriage of justice rather than rigid deadlines; leniency may be exercised - [New India Assurance Company Limited VS Surinder Kaur - 2003 0 Supreme(P&H) 735]

• "Constitutional revisional jurisdiction" - Article 227 powers permit intervention to prevent miscarriage of justice in cases involving amended CPC provisions and pending pleadings - [New India Assurance Company Limited VS Surinder Kaur - 2003 0 Supreme(P&H) 735]

• "Amendment Act savings clause" - Section 16(2)(b) of the CPC Amendment Acts (1999, 2002) saved pleadings filed before commencement from certain amended Order VI Rules (e.g., Rule 17/18); older suits governed by pre-amendment rules - [Sadiq Ali & another VS Manu Narang - 1984 0 Supreme(Bom) 264]

• "Pre-amendment vs post-amendment pleadings" - Pleadings filed before July 1, 2002 fall outside the proviso that restricts amendments after trial; amendments in such suits may be allowed under pre-2002 regime - [Harihar Automobiles (P) Ltd. Thru M. D. G. D. Agarwal VS P. L. Bhargava - 2014 0 Supreme(All) 3421]

• "Relation back of amendments" - When amendments are allowed under Order 6 Rule 17, they typically relate back to the date of the original pleading, unless limitation issues apply - [Silak Ram VS Bhim Singh - 1992 0 Supreme(P&H) 572]

• "Due diligence standard" - Post-2002 proviso requires showing that, despite due diligence, the matter could not have been raised before trial; lack of due diligence can bar amendments in trials commenced after 1.7.2002 - [Rethinam alias Anna Samuthiram Ammal & Others VS Syed Abdul Rahim - 2005 0 Supreme(Mad) 378]

• "Amendment of plaints post-trial commencement" - For suits filed before amendment, courts often apply older liberal doctrine; post-2002 amendments require justification under the proviso; failure may lead to rejection - [Rethinam alias Anna Samuthiram Ammal & Others VS Syed Abdul Rahim - 2005 0 Supreme(Mad) 378]

• "Judicial approach to amendment as justice-subservient" - Courts emphasize liberal amendment to decide real controversy, provided no substantial prejudice and no contrary limitation; avoid multiplicity of suits - [Manakchand VS Dhanraj - 1987 0 Supreme(MP) 4]

• "Amendment of written statements" - Written statement amendments are permissible when necessary to determine real issues, subject to due diligence and potential costs to compensate other party - [Manakchand VS Dhanraj - 1987 0 Supreme(MP) 4]

• "Amendment leading to recall of witnesses" - Allowing amendments may require recalling witnesses; discretion exercised to balance fairness and efficiency; costs may be imposed - [Manakchand VS Dhanraj - 1987 0 Supreme(MP) 4]

• "MATERIAL irregularity standards (Revision under Art. 227)" - Revisions under Art. 227 consider material irregularities in adopting amendments; may uphold or set aside orders based on justice and due process - [P. Raghu VS K. Anjaiah - 2003 0 Supreme(AP) 1415]

• "Amendment of execution petitions" - Section 151/153 interplay allows correction of execution petitions to reflect real questions; amendments permissible when not prejudicial - [Nihal Singh (Deceased) through LRs. vs Gobind Singh (Deceased) through LRs. - 2025 0 Supreme(P&H) 1577]

• "Amendment in payment/maintenance context" - Amendments in quasi-criminal maintenance proceedings may be allowed under Section 151 CPC; civil-like procedural flexibility applies - [Bibhas Debnath VS State of West Bengal - 2015 0 Supreme(Cal) 741]

• "O.R. 8A cross-exam timings and amendments" - Post-amendment regime (Order VIII Rule 1A) permits production or denial of documents at cross-examination with leave; amendments to pleadings interact with cross-exam provisions - [Dukhan Rai VS Mahendra Raj - 2007 0 Supreme(Pat) 718]

• "Proceedings timelines post-amendment" - The 1999/2002 CPC amendments aimed to curb delays; however, savings clauses mean pending suits before these dates follow older rules unless explicitly saved - [Padmavathi Ammal & Others VS S. Muthiah & Others - 2004 0 Supreme(Mad) 898]

• "Relief against clerical errors vs substantive changes" - Courts distinguish clerical corrections (permissible) from substantial amendments that alter the case; due diligence and prejudice scrutiny applied - [Ajit Singh VS Jaswinder Kaur - 2008 0 Supreme(P&H) 1356]

• "Relation back and limitation cautions" - Amendments relate back unless the amendment relates to the law of limitation; otherwise may affect remedy timing - [Silak Ram VS Bhim Singh - 1992 0 Supreme(P&H) 572]

• "Interplay of pre-1980s precedents with amended rules" - Older precedents on liberal amendments (e.g., allowing amendments to avoid injustice) continue to inform current practice but must be reconciled with 1999/2002 changes - [Manakchand VS Dhanraj - 1987 0 Supreme(MP) 4]

• "Notice on amendment of pleadings and due process" - Proper notice and opportunity to respond are essential when amendments are allowed; courts may order costs to offset procedural delays - [Manakchand VS Dhanraj - 1987 0 Supreme(MP) 4]

• "Judicial review of CPC amendments" - Supreme Court consistently held that amendments should serve justice and expedite proceedings, not prejudice the other party; proviso ensures due diligence after trial begins - [Nihar Ranjan Das VS Sipra Das - 2010 0 Supreme(Cal) 558]

• "Supreme Court guidance on pre-amendment flexibility" - Pre-amendment era allowed broad amendment; post-amendment regime reduces scope but preserves due process via savings clause - [Laxman Das VS Deoji Mal - 2002 0 Supreme(Raj) 1014]

S.19 Amendment of Order IX

       In the First Schedule, in Order IX,--
       (i) for rule 2, the following rule shall be substituted, namely: --
       "2. Dismissal of suit where summons not served by the plaintiff or his agent or in consequences of failure to pay cost.--Where on the day sofixed it is found that the summons has not been sent within stipulated period of two days, to the defendant by the plaintiff or his agent or in consequence of their failure to pay the Court-fee or any charges, if any chargeable for such service, the Court shall make an order that the suit be dismissed:
       Provided that no such order shall be made if, notwithstanding such failure, the defendant attends in person or by agent when he is allowed to appear by agent on the day fixed for him to appear and answer.";
       (i

S.20 Amendment of Order X

       In the First Schedule, in Order X, --
       (i) after rule I, the following rules shall be inserted, namely: --
       "1A. Direction of the Court to opt for any one mode of alternative dispute resolution.--After recording the admissions and denials, the Court shall direct the parties to the suit to opt either mode of the settlement outside the Court as specified in sub-section (1) of section 89. On the option of the parties, the Court shall fix the date of appearance before such forum or authority as may be opted by the parties.
       1B. Appearance before the conciliatory forum or authority.--Where a suit is referred under rule 1A, the parties shall appear before such forum or authority for conciliation of the suit.
       1C. Appearance before the Court consequent to the

S.21 Amendment of Order XL

       In the First Schedule, in Order XI,--
       (i) in rule 2, after the words "submitted to the Court", the words "and that Court shall decide within seven days from the day of filing of the said application", shall be inserted;
       (ii) in rule 15, for the words "at any time", the words "at or before the settlement of issues" shall be substituted.

S.22 Amendment of Order XII

       In the First Schedule, in Order XII,--
       (i) in rule 2, for the word "fifteen", the word "seven" shall be substituted;
       (ii) in rule 4, second proviso shall be omitted.

S.23 Amendment of Order XIII

       In the First Schedule, in Order XIII, for rules I and 2, the following rule shall be substituted, namely:--
       "1. Original documents to be produced at or before the settlement of issues.--(1) The parties or their pleader shall produce on or before the settlement of issues, all the documentary evidence in original where the copies thereof have been filed along with plaint or written statement.
       (2) The Court shall receive the documents so produced:
       Provided that they are accompanied by an accurate list thereof prepared in such form as the High Court directs.
       (3) Nothing in sub-rule (1) shall apply to documents--
       (a) produced for the cross-examination of the witnesses of the other party; or
  &nbs

S.24 Amendment of Order XIV

       In the First Schedule, in Order XIV,--
       (i) in rule 4, for the words "may adjourn the framing of the issues to a future day", the words "may adjourn the framing of issues to a day not later than seven days" shall be substituted.
       (ii) rule 5 shall be omitted.

S.25 Amendment of Order XVL

       In the First Schedule, in Order XVI,--
       (i) in rule I, sub-rule (4), for the words "Court in this behalf, occurring at the end, the words, brackets and figure "Court in this behalf within five days of presenting the list of witnesses under sub-rule (1)" shall be substituted;
       (ii) in rule 2, in sub-rule (1), after the words "within a period to be fixed", the words, brackets and figures "which shall not be later than seven days from the date of making application under sub-rule (4) of rule 1" shall be inserted.

S.26 Amendment of Order XVII

       In the First Schedule, in Order XVII, in rule 1,--
       (i) for sub-rule (1), the following shall be substituted, namely:--
       "(1) The Court may, if sufficient cause is shown, at any stage of the suit, grant time to the parties or to any of them, and may from time to time adjourn the hearing of me suit for reasons to be recorded in writing:
       Provided that no such adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a party during hearing of the suit.";
       (ii) In sub-rule (2), for the words "may make such order as it thinks fit with respect to the costs occasioned by the adjournment", the words "shall make such order as to costs occasioned by the adjournment or such higher costs as the Court deems fit" shall be substituted.

S.27 Amendment of Order XVIII

       the First Schedule, in Order XVIII,--
       (i) sub-rule (4) of rule 2 shall be omitted;
       (ii) for rule 4, the following rule shall be substituted, namely:--
       "4. Recording of evidence by commissioner.--(1) In every case, the evidence of a witness of his examination-in-chief shall be given by affidavit nd copies thereof shall be supplied to the opposite party by the party who calls him for evidence.
       (2) The evidence (cross-examination and re-examination) of the witness in attendance, whose evidence (examination-in-chief) by affidavit has been furnished to the Court shall be taken orally by a commissioner to be appointed by the Court from amongst the panel of commissioners prepared for this purpose on the same day:
      &nbs

S.28 Amendment of Order XX

       In the First Schedule, in Order XX,--
       (i) in rule 1, in sub-rule (2), the words "but a copy of the whole judgment shall be made available for the perusal of the parties or the pleaders immediately after the judgment is pronounced" shall be omitted;
       (ii) for rules 6A and 6B, the following rules shall be substituted, namely:--
       "6A. Preparation of decree.--(1) Every endeavour shall be made to ensure that the decree is drawn up as expeditiously as possible and, in any case, within fifteen days from the date on which the judgment is pronounced.
       (2) An appeal may be preferred against the decree without filing a copy of the decree and in such a case the copy made available to the party by the Court shall for the purposes of rule 1 of Order XLI be treated a

S.29 Amendment of Order XXVI

       In the First Schedule, in Order XXVI, after rule 4, the following rule shall be inserted, namely:--
       "4A. Commission for examination of any person resident within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court.--Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, any Court may, in the interest of justice or for the expeditious disposal of the case or for any other reason, issue commission in any suit for the examination, on interrogatories or otherwise, of any person resident within the local limits of its jurisdiction, and the evidence so recorded shall be read in evidence.

S.30 Amendment of Order XXXIX

       In the First Schedule, in Order XXXIX, rule 1 shall be renumbered as sub-rule (1) of that rule and after sub-rule (1) as so renumbered, the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:--
       "(2) The Court shall, while granting a temporary injunction to restrain such act or to make such other order for the purposes of staying and preventing the wasting, damaging, alienation, sale, removal or disposition of property or dispossession of the plaintiff, or otherwise causing injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property under disposition in the suit under sub-rule (1) direct the plaintiff to give security or otherwise as the Court thinks fit.".

S.31 Amendment of Order XLI

       In the First Schedule, in Order XLI,--
       (i) in sub-rule (1) of rule 1, for the words and brackets "decree appealed from and (unless the Appellate Court dispenses therewith) of the judgment on which it is founded", the word "judgment" shall be substituted;
       (ii) for rule 9, the following rule shall be substituted, namely:--
       "9. Registry of memorandum of appeal.--(1) The Court from whose decree an appeal lies shall entertain the memorandum of appeal and shall endorse thereon the date of presentation and shall register the appeal in a book of appeal kept for that purpose.
       (2) Such book shall be called the register of appeal.";
       (iii) in rule 11, for sub-rule (1), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, nam

S.32 Repeal and savings

       (1) Any amendment made, or any provision inserted in the principal Act by a State Legislature or High Court before the commencement of this Act shall, except insofar as such amendment or provisions is consistent with the provisions of the principal Act as amended by this Act, stand repealed.
       (2) Notwithstanding that the provisions of this Act have come into force or repeal under sub-section (1) has taken effect, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897),--
       (a) the provisions of section 26 of the principal Act and of Order IV of the First Schedule, as amended by sections 2 and 14 of this Act, shall not apply to or affect any suit pending immediately before the commencement of sections 2 and 14; and every such suit shall be tried as if sections 2 and 14 had not com

S.33 Amendment of section 12

In the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), in section 12 in sub-section (3), the words "on which the decree or order is founded" at the end shall be omitted.

S.34 Insertion of new section 16

       In the Court Fees' Act, 1870 (7 of 1870) (hereafter in this Chapter referred to as the Court Fees' Act), after section 15, the following section shall be inserted, namely: --
       "16. Refund of fee.--Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to any one of the mode of settlement of dispute referred to in section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) the plaintiff shall be entitled to a certificate from the Court authorising him to receive back from the collector, the full amount of the fee paid in respect of such plaint.".