“When an ex-parte decree is passed, there are two remedies – either (a) file an application under Order 9, Rule 13; or (b) file an appeal under Section 96(2). The question to be considered is whether the two options are to be exercised simultaneously or can also be exercised consecutively. If the appeal under Section […]Read more "Order 9, Rule 13 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"
At the outset, there is no gainsaying that procedural justice is imbibed to provide further impetus to substantive justice. On the other hand, we must be mindful of the legislative intention to provide for certainty and clarity. In the name of substantive justice, providing unlimited and unrestricted rights in itself will be detrimental to certainty […]Read more "Order 8, Rule 6A of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"
“Order 21, Rule 11(3) makes it clear that the Court ‘may’ require the decree holder to produce a certified copy of the decree. This clearly indicates that it is not necessary to file a copy of the decree along with execution application unless the Court directs the decree holder to file a certified copy of […]Read more "Order 21, Rule 11(3) of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"
A suit was filed on 10.03.2017. The defendant was served with summons on 14.07.2017. 120 days from this date takes us to 11.11.2017. No written statement had been filed. However, an Order 7, Rule 11 application was filed. The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 came into force […]Read more "Order 8, Rule 1 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"
“The question of entitlement to file a suit under Order 33 provided plaintiff is able to prove that he is not possessed of sufficient means to pay the requisite fees is required to be decided by holding an inquiry as prescribed under Order 33, Rules 4-7. Rule 9 empowers the Court to withdraw the permission […]Read more "Order 33, 44 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"
Issues of Tribunals: Unresolved. 07.05.2018 “The functioning of Tribunals is required to be reviewed on the test of speedy and inexpensive quality justice. L. Chandra Kumar, (1997) 3 SCC 261 noted that various Tribunals have not evolved up to the expectations which is self-evident and widely acknowledged. Drastic measures were required to elevate the standards. […]Read more "Rojer Mathew, SLP (Civil) 15804/2017"
“Unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, such strict standard of proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy. When the parties live together as husband and wife, there is a presumption that they are legally married couple for […]Read more "Masterly Concubinage II"