Court : Delhi
Reported in : 160(2009)DLT118; (2009)155PLR49
..... notification dated 21.4.1998 in the context of the provisions with which we are concerned, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:i. the following shall be inserted as rule 1(a) in order xvii of the code of civil procedure, 1908:rule 1(a) on the occurrence of an unanticipated holiday or in the event of the presiding officer of a court being absent owing to ..... could have been allowed. however, since the appellant/defendant no. 1 was not present at the hearing when the suit was originally dismissed, that is 20.9.2005, we are of the view that order ix rule 4 is the provision of the code of civil procedure, 1908 which stands attracted and not order ix rule 9 thereof as contended by learned counsel for the appellant. we ..... with simple interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum and costs of rupees 51,416/-.4. ia no. 1834/2006 under order ix rule 13 cpccpccpc was filed by the appellant on 15.1.2008 praying for recalling the ex parte judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007. this application has been supported by the affidavit of mr. hasmukh khatri ..... on which the dismissal of the suit occurred. if this was not the intention of the legislature, it would have mandated the issuance of a notice even under rule 4 of order ix. the cpccpccpc in order ix itself specifically postulates situations where some of the plaintiffs or defendants, as the case may be, are absent, and permits different treatment in that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1977Delhi19
..... of the courts in granting adjournments during a trial as is apparent from the bill to amend the civil procedure codecivil procedure codecivil procedure code which is pending in the parliament.5. it is important to remember that the general rule is that witnesses should be examined by the parties in open court and their evidence tested by cross- ..... issues on the matters at which the parties are found at variance (order xiv).3. the procedure for trying the case is laid down in order xvii, rule 1 of the code. it is in the following terms:'1. (1) the court may, if sufficient cause is shown, at any stage of the suit grant time ..... 1. issuing commissions for recording the statements of witnesses is not unusual in civil cases. it is being done ever since the code of civil procedure was enforced more than a hundred years ago. whenever a case for such examination is made out, parties are allowed to ..... not be forgotten that rendered by mr. s. l. bhatia.9.order xviii provides for the hearing of the suit and examination of witnesses. rule 1 provides for the circumstances under which the defendant will have the right to begin,failing which the right to begin,failing which the right to begin ..... of the law commission of india on 'reform of judicial administration (1958)' notes with concern the failure of the courts to appreciate that order xvii, rule 1 'contemplates the continued hearing of a case, once it has started, from day to day until it is finished'. the commission found that the judiciary seemed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj21; (1961)GLR635; (1961)0GLR165
..... be found in other provisions already quoted earlier. the rules framed by the high court would therefore supersede the rules under the civil procedure codecivil procedure codecivil procedure code. rules of procedure in the matter of writs would, therefore, be govered by the special rules relating to writ petitions framed by the bombay high courtand not by order 1, rule 1 of (he code of civil procedure. rule i of these rules reads as follows: 'every application for the issue of ..... when deciding writ petitions.8. if high courts when deciding writ petitions are not courts of civil judicature for purposes of civil procedure codecivil procedure codecivil procedure code, then order 1 rule 1 of c. p. code would not apply to the procedure of writ petitions. section 141 c. p. code providesthat the procedure provided in that code as regards suits shall be followed as far as it can be made applicable, in all proceedings in ..... the calcutta case, it has been held that order 1, civil procedure codecivil procedure codecivil procedure code, may be followed analogously. in the absence of special rules framed by the high court, the rules contained in order 1, rule 1, c. p. code, would apply in terms as already observed by us. we, therefore, hold that the rules under order 1, rule i, have been superseded by the special rules framed by the high court.13. it is also .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2005Kant23; ILR2004KAR4141; 2004(6)KarLJ130
..... statement on the ground that it had no power to extend time beyond what is stipulated under order viii rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908.4. the suit in question was filed after 01.07.2002 ie., after coming into force of the code of civil procedure (amendment) act, 2002 ('the amendment act' for short). the application for leave to file written statement was admittedly ..... the amendment act. that is not the case here. on the facts of the present case, the time to file written statement is governed by the amended order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc.6. in view of the above, the impugned order cannot be said to suffer from any error of jurisdiction warranting interference under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under ..... filed beyond the time allowable under the amended order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc i.e., beyond 90 days from the date of ..... : ilr2004kar1399 . in the said case, the division bench while interpreting the amended order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc has held that a court trying a civil suit does not have any power to extend time for filing of written statement beyond what is stipulated under order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc.5. the judgment in mohammed anwar's case referred to above is not applicable to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3304; 2005(4)AWC3861G(SC); 2005(3)BLJR2132; 2005(4)CTC809; [2005(4)JCR118(SC)]; JT2005(7)SC409; 2006(I)OLR(SC)8; (2005)141PLR627; RLW2005(4)SC2244; (2005)6SCC705;
..... order the learned single judge found no substance in the plea of the appellant that there was non-compliance with the requirements of order viii rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (in short 'cpccpccpc') as amended by the code of civil procedure (amendment) act, 2002 (in short the 'amendment act').3. factual position is almost undisputed and, therefore, need not be elaborated. respondent was served with summons ..... the laws relating to the procedure of the courts of civil judicature. it has undergone several amendments by several acts of central and state legislatures ..... provisions of order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc are directory and when written statement has already been filed and accepted by the trial court, the high court has rightly rejected appellant's plea.5. the scope and ambit of order viii rule 1 of cpccpccpc has been examined in detail by this court in kailash v. nanhku and ors. : air2005sc2441. the cpccpccpc enacted in 1908 consolidated and amended .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
..... or qualified or circumscribed by the amended provision of order viii rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (in short the c.p.c.) which came to be amended by act no. 22 of 2002 of the code of civil procedure (amendment) act 2002 with effect from 1-7-2002 on a justifiable ground to the satisfaction of the ..... and at the same time while doing justice in the larger interest the court is not powerless even after the amended provision of order viii rule 1 of the c.p.c. in exercising the jurisdiction in permitting filing of written statement and accepting it after saddling the defaulter with heavy or ..... controlled. however, it does not in any way restrict or restrain a competent civil court to exercise jurisdiction to accept the written statement even at the late stage beyond the period prescribed under amended provision of order viii rule i of the c.p.c. provided the party responsible for delay is saddled with ..... service of summons.'5. prima facie on the plain perusal of the said provision it may appear that the said amended provision of order viii rule 1 with proviso does not permit the court to exercise the power to grant permission or to accept the written statement beyond the prescribed period. however, ..... floods effect on the area in which the civil court geographically is situated.7. in the net result, the impugned order of the trial court is found to be not in consonance with the aforesaid principle of the amended provision of order viii rule i of the c.p.c. and contrary to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2009(40)PTC622(Del)
..... judge has firstly granted the request made on behalf of the defendants for filing the written statement as well as the reply to the application under order xxxix rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 ('cpccpccpc' hereinafter) within two weeks. secondly, having done so, and briefly considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the learned single judge has ordered the ..... parte ad interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the subject copyrighted material. in our view, this is not the norm prescribed by law. 2. order xxxix of the cpccpccpc lays down in rule 1 the circumstances in which a temporary injunction can be passed; it does not speak of an ex parte ad interim injunction. this is also the position as regards ..... rule 2 of order xxxix of the cpccpccpc, which postulates the passing of an injunction to restrain the repetition or continuance of the breach of a contract. in the present case, prima ..... certain that all these factors will be kept in mind by the learned single judge when he decides the interim application no. 5670/2009 filed under order xxxix of the code of civil procedure, 1908. 9. some discussion has been generated on the change of the date from 29.5.2009 to 2.7.2009, that is, immediately on the reopening after the summer .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2007(3)ALD92(SC); 2007(2)AWC1899(SC); 2007(4)MhLj615; (2007)3MLJ465(SC); 2007MPLJ293(SC); 2007(4)SCALE358; (2007)4SCC133
..... passed by a division bench of the delhi high court granting conditional leave to the appellants to defend in a summary suit in terms of order xxxvii rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (in short the 'cpccpccpc'). appellants are the defendants in the said suit. the appellants filed an application for leave to defend in the same suit. learned single judge of the high ..... court found that the grounds taken in the application for leave to defend were sham and moonshine. the plaintiff/respondent had filed the suit in terms of rule xxxvii rule 1 ..... based upon four cheques which were purportedly issued by defendant no. 2 i.e. appellant no. 2 herein, in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents. the cheques were dishonored with the remark that the payments were stopped ..... amount which is due for payment. learned single judge refused to grant leave to defend. the plaintiff was held to be entitled for decree for recovery of the concerned amount i.e. rs. 39,30,856/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of suit till realization. the plaintiff was also held to be entitled .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 111CompCas525(Mad)
..... filed by the defendants under order 14, rule 8 of the original side rules read with order 24, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, to permit the defendants to deposit a sum of rs. 13,64,500 and direct the plaintiff-bank to deliver the documents of title to them and pass appropriate orders ..... from proceeding with the right to recover their legitimate dues in accordance with law.4. heard learned counsel of both the sides.5. the points that arise for consideration are : (1) whether the applicants/ defendants can be permitted to deposit a sum of rs. 13,64,500 and direct the plaintiff-bank to deliver the documents of title to them ? (2 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(2)BomCR434; (2003)1BOMLR266; 2003(1)MhLj703
..... district judge had committed an error on the face of it inasmuch as a bare perusal of sections 28 and 34 of land acquisition act read with order xxi, rule 1 of code of civil procedure, 1908, would clearly indicate that the state was not liable to pay any additional interest as directed by the learned judge except for the period from 1st april 1996 to ..... with the issue of appropriation of the amounts towards the interest or towards the principal. in that context, the apex court has observed in paragraph 16 that order xxi, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, may be inconsistent with what is contained in sections 34 and 28 of the land acquisition act. in the instant case, there is no case of appropriation of ..... circumstances, the learned addl. advocate general submits that ex facie reading the provisions of sections 28 and 34 of the land acquisition act and also of order xxi, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, it is clear that the claimants in this matter cannot insist upon that the petitioners state ought to deposit the amount in court and that the petitioners state is ..... deposited before the date of such expiry.' 9. apart from the above, the learned addl. advocate general also pointed out the provisions of order xxi, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, wherein the relevant portion reads as under:- '1. modes of paying money payable under a decree shall be paid as follows, namely:- (a)... ... ... ... (b) out of court, to the decree-holder by postal .....Tag this Judgment!