Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Reports by Nazir must be properly verified and compliant with procedural rules; improper or illegal reports impact the validity of execution proceedings ["Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["SRI DHURBAJYOTI BORA vs SRI RAGHUNATH SATNAMI AND 4 ORS - Gauhati"]- ["AMARENDRA KUMAR vs SMT.ANJALI DEVI - Patna"]- ["Hiraman Prasad VS Ramni Devi - Jharkhand"]- ["AMARENDRA KUMAR vs SMT.ANJALI DEVI - Patna"]- ["Ramesh Kuamr vs Devchand - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811"]- ["Mohammad Gulam Rabbani VS Bankipore Hari Sabha - Patna"]
In the intricate world of civil litigation in India, proper service of summons and execution of court orders form the bedrock of fair proceedings. One key figure often central to this process is the Nazir, a court officer whose functions are enshrined in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC). But what exactly are the provisions governing the Nazir in CPC? This question arises frequently among litigants, lawyers, and courts when challenging service or execution irregularities.
This blog post delves into the Nazir's responsibilities, drawing from judicial precedents and statutory rules. We'll explore service verification, endorsements, execution roles, and procedural safeguards—generally speaking, as this is not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
The Nazir serves as an authorized court officer tasked with executing processes like service of summons and other orders. Primarily under Order V of the CPC, the Nazir verifies service and endorses declarations, ensuring procedural integrity. As noted, The Nazir is an officer authorized to verify service of process and endorse declarations regarding service Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811.
Key functions include:- Verifying summons service through official endorsements like refused or served.- Executing attachments and evictions, as seen in cases involving property orders Rameshwardayal Ramswaroop VS Bheemsen Dulichand - Madhya Pradesh (1950).- Creating presumptions of proper service under Section 114(e) of the Evidence Act, where Court shall presume that the act in discharge of official business was performed regularly Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811.
These roles uphold jurisdiction; invalid service can derail entire proceedings.
Service of summons follows Order V CPC, with Rule 19A (amended by High Courts, e.g., on 25th July 1928) emphasizing verified declarations. The declaration of the process server on the overleaf of summon, duly endorsed by a Nazir, in view of the amended provision of Order 5 Rule 19A of the Code of Civil Procedure... is admissible as evidence Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811.
Failure here, such as unverified endorsements, may invalidate service Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811. Relatedly, in ex-parte scenarios, courts must confirm summons duly served under Order 9 Rule 6 CPC before proceeding, ensuring no procedural shortcuts JUBEDA KHATUN VS PRABIN DEKA - 2015 Supreme(Gau) 1380.
Beyond service, the Nazir executes decrees, attachments, and possessions under Order XXI CPC. For instance, in execution proceedings, Nazir reports on possession delivery: according to the report of the Nazir dated 26.7.1992, the Judgment debtors No. 1 to 6 had vacated the suit premises but Judgment debtor No. 7... had not given the possession Tanzeem-e-sufia VS Bibi Haliman - 2002 6 Supreme 109.
In partition suits or compromises, courts cannot direct Nazir for pre-decree possession without CPC backing: there is no such provision in the C.P.C. to make such direction to the Nazir to give delivery of possession prior to decree AMARENDRA KUMAR vs SMT.ANJALI DEVI.
Courts stress strict adherence. Verified Nazir endorsements prevent challenges and uphold proceedings. Non-compliance, like unexamined Nazir reports, renders actions inadmissible: the report, if any, of the Shrestdar was not admissible in evidence without his examination as witness Amarendra Kumar VS Anjali Devi - 2011 Supreme(Pat) 38.
In execution sales, Nazir's role in auctions or bonds ensures fairness, as deviations (e.g., under Order 21 Rule 89) demand full compliance Kishanlal Gordhandas Gupta VS Suwalal Brijmohan Sunar - 1959 Supreme(MP) 207. Similarly, in winding-up executions, prior orders confirming sales bar later pleas Padmawati Sugars Limited VS Official Liquidator Of Ace Laboratories Ltd. - 2018 Supreme(Raj) 2183.
While presumptive, Nazir's work isn't infallible. Challenges succeed if:- Endorsements lack verification or consistency Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811.- Service flouts Order V Rule 19, e.g., no process server affidavit Jagdish Pandey VS Urmila Pandey - 2015 Supreme(Jhk) 415.- Execution ignores rules, like premature Order 21 Rule 97 applications Tanzeem-e-sufia VS Bibi Haliman - 2002 6 Supreme 109.
Courts may set aside ex-parte decrees if service satisfaction isn't recorded: a duty is cast upon the trial court to ensure service of notice and record its satisfaction on valid service Syed Askari Hadi Ali Augustine Imam alias Tootoo Imam VS Shamim Amna Imam - 2013 Supreme(Pat) 1304. High Court amendments strengthen safeguards, but lapses remain grounds for nullity.
To navigate these provisions effectively:- Verify Documentation: Ensure Nazir's endorsements are filed and checked.- Rebut Presumptions: Challengers must prove non-service with evidence.- Adhere to Amendments: Follow High Court-updated rules under Order V.- Execution Caution: Use Nazir reports judiciously in possessions or attachments.
In related contexts, like electricity disputes, civil courts retain jurisdiction over irregular assessments, underscoring CPC's broad application Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. VS Jaswant @ Jaibir - 2017 Supreme(P&H) 2163.
The Nazir's provisions in CPC—centered on Order V for service and Order XXI for execution—ensure procedural justice. From verifying summons to executing attachments, the Nazir's verified endorsements create evidentiary presumptions vital for valid proceedings Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811Rameshwardayal Ramswaroop VS Bheemsen Dulichand - Madhya Pradesh (1950).
Litigants should prioritize compliance to avoid reversals, while courts must rigorously oversee processes. This overview highlights general principles; outcomes vary by facts. For tailored guidance, seek professional legal counsel.
References:- Nikhil Kr. Chatterjee VS Samir Kr. Chatterjee - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 811: Nazir's verification and endorsements.- Rameshwardayal Ramswaroop VS Bheemsen Dulichand - Madhya Pradesh (1950): Execution and attachments.- Tanzeem-e-sufia VS Bibi Haliman - 2002 6 Supreme 109: Order 21 possessions.- Others integrated as noted.
Stay informed on CPC nuances to strengthen your civil cases.
#NazirCPC, #CivilProcedureCode, #LegalInsights
25.06.2018 that with the help of police and lat mandal, the Civil Nazir had identified the decreetal land on which execution was to be carried out. ... Thereafter, the respondents, who are judgment debtor had filed an application before the Court of Munsiff, Hojai under Section 47 read with order 21 Rule 58 read with Section 151 CPC, which was registered as Misc(J) Case No.32/2018.
The learned counsel for the respondent is also unable to show me such provision in C.P.C. empowering the Court to pass such orders. ... Moreover, the report, if any, of the Shrestdar was not admissible in evidence without his examination as witness, there is no such provision in the C.P.C. to make such direction to the Nazir to give delivery of possession prior to decree ... Earlier, the order recording or refusing to record the compromise was appealable under Order 43 Rule 1 (M) C....
Order 21, Rule 89 is a provision giving latitude to the judgment-debtor. ... In the face of this statement, it is not open to the Appellant now to say that the failure on his part to deposit the entire amount required under Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure code was due to any miscalculation on the part of the Nazir. ... That being so, the Courts have always held that the provision of Rule 89 must be strictly complied with and a sale would not be set aside unless the entire amount specified in Sub-rule (1) is de....
manner calculated to defeat the statutory provision." ... any action done by the Nazir null and void. ... The statutory provision is contained in Order 41 Rule 5(3) and in passing the order the Court ignored this provision. 25. Even on the incorrect supposition that the appeal had already been filed we think that the order could not be a judicial order. ... It held that the order passed was not under Order 41 Rule 5 at all but u/s 161, Code of Civil Procedure 8. ... Relying upon this decision; the learn....
The learned Counsel for the Respondent is also unable to show me such provision in Code of Code of Civil Procedure empowering the Court to pass such orders. ... Moreover, the report, if any, of the Shrestdar was not admissible in evidence without his examination as witness, there is no such provision in the Code of Code of Civil Procedure to make such direction to the Nazir to give delivery of possession prior to decree is passed. ... From bare reading of Order 23 Rule 3 C.P.C., it app....
The provision contained under Order 21 Rule 101 CPC seems to have escaped notice of the High Court while passing the order. ... It is said that according to the report of the Nazir dated 26.7.1992, the Judgment debtors No. 1 to 6 had vacated the suit premises but Judgment debtor No. 7 Siwaitulla son of Kahamatulla had not given the possession and at the time the Nazir went to execute the delivery of the possession he found that ... , filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC, were premature. ... 2....
The provision contained under Order 21 Rule 101 CPC seems to have escaped notice of the report of the Nazir dated 26.7.1992, the Judgment son of the Judgment debtor told the Nazir that property that Judgment debtor was lying in bed and doctors Judgment debtor No. 7 Siwaitulla son of Kahamatulla had not given the possession and at the time the Nazir
the Nazir. ... It is not only a surety bond given under Order 38 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code which could be enforced under sec. 145 of the Civil Procedure Code. ... He therefore, made an application under O.38 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code that the mortgage property was insufficient to pay off the entire debt and the judgment debtor was going to dispose of his other property and the same be so attached under O. 38 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code and it was ... It has been held in this lat....
The provision of Section 47 of the C.P.C. confers power upon the executing court to determine the questions in court which has been recalled under the provision of Section 151 of the Code for execution of decrees and orders. ... . by recalling the acceptance of format of the deed as has been accepted vide order dated 06.09.2014 and the authorization of Nazir has passed an order by authorizing the Nazir, Civil Court, Hazaribagh to p style="position:absolute;white-space:
It needs to be referred herein the power of the executing court as has been provided under Order XXI of the C.P.C. which contains the provision for execution of decrees and orders. ... The provision of Section 47 of the C.P.C. confers power upon the executing court to determine the questions in case of any objection being raised. Likewise, under the provisions of Order XXI Rule 97, 98 and 99 the objection can be filed to be decided by the executing court. ... to execute sale- deed on behalf of the court which has been re....
The argument in reference to the provision of CPC has been given. The plea of even bonafide purchaser was not accepted. The rights claimed by the applicant company were decided by this Court in the.earlier application.
The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all Suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. The Code of Civil Procedure (for short, ‘CPC’) gives the plannery power and jurisdiction to civil court to try all kind of suits of civil nature except specifically barred under some other statutory provision of law. The relevant provision of CPC as contained in Section 9 is reproduced herein below:-
The provision contained in Order 5, Rule 6 CPC is pertinent. It contemplates three situations when on a date fixed for hearing the plaintiff appears and the defendant does not appear and three courses to be followed by the Court depending on the given situation, The three situations are : (i) When summons duly served, (ii) when summons not duly served, and (iii) when summons served but not in due time. In the first situation, which is relevant here, when it is proved that the sumnmons was duly served, the Court may make an order that the suit be heard ex-parte.
The provision contained in Order 9 Rule 6 CPC is pertinent. The three situations are: (i) when summons duly served, (ii) when summons not duly served, and (iii) when summons served but not in due time. It contemplates three situations when on a date fixed for hearing the plaintiff appears and the defendant does not appear and three courses to be followed by the court depending on the given situation.
The provision contained in Order 9 Rule 6 CPC is pertinent. The three situations are: (i) when summons duly served, (ii) when summons not duly served, and (iii) when summons served but not in due time. It contemplates three situations when on a date fixed for hearing the plaintiff appears and the defendant does not appear and three courses to be followed by the court depending on the given situation.
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
