Author: toahostinger

Deposit by Defendant, Security for Costs, and Commission under CPC (Code of Civil Procedure) The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) provides a detailed framework for fair adjudication of civil disputes in India. Among its various provisions, Order 24 (Deposit by Defendant), Order 25 (Security for Costs), and Order 26 (Commissions) hold significant importance. These orders ensure that litigation is conducted efficiently, unnecessary costs are avoided, and courts can access evidence even outside their premises. This article explains these provisions in detail with illustrations, case laws, and practical examples. 🔹 Order 24 CPC – Deposit by Defendant in Satisfaction of Claim Order 24 CPC deals with situations where the defendant deposits money in court to satisfy the plaintiff’s claim, either fully or partially. 1. Deposit by Defendant • In suits for debt or damages, the defendant may deposit in court any sum he considers as full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s claim. • This can be done at any stage of the suit. 2. Notice of Deposit • Once the deposit is made, the court must notify the plaintiff. • Unless directed otherwise, the plaintiff can withdraw the deposited amount upon application. 3. Interest Not Payable After Notice • From the date of notice, the plaintiff is not entitled to interest on the sum deposited—whether it represents full or part satisfaction. 4. Plaintiff’s Response to the Deposit The plaintiff has two options: (i) Acceptance as Part Satisfaction • Plaintiff may accept the deposit as partial satisfaction and continue the suit for the balance. • If the court later finds the deposit was sufficient, the plaintiff may have to bear litigation costs incurred after the deposit. (ii) Acceptance as Full Satisfaction • Plaintiff may accept the deposit as full settlement, and the court shall pronounce judgment accordingly. • Costs will depend on which party was responsible for unnecessary litigation. Illustrations under Order 24 CPC (a) A owes B ₹100. Without making a demand, B files a suit. A deposits ₹100 in court. Since the litigation was unnecessary, B cannot claim costs. (b) A disputes the debt but later deposits ₹100. B accepts. Here, B may claim costs as A’s conduct led to litigation. (c) B sues A for ₹150 when only ₹100 is due. A deposits ₹100. B accepts it as full satisfaction. The court may direct B to bear A’s costs as the excess claim was unjustified. 🔹 Order 25 CPC – Security for Costs Order 25 CPC empowers courts to ensure that defendants are not burdened with unrecoverable costs if the plaintiff is unlikely to pay. 1. When Can Court Ask for Security? At any stage, the court may direct the plaintiff to deposit security for costs, either: • On its own motion (suo motu), or • On application by the defendant. This is to cover: • Costs already incurred, and • Costs likely to be incurred in the future. 2. Mandatory Security – Plaintiff Residing Outside India The court must order security when: • There is only one plaintiff, • He resides outside India, and • Owns no immovable property in India (except the disputed property). If there are multiple plaintiffs, this applies only if all satisfy the above conditions. Example: Aman, an Indian citizen, files a case but soon leaves for Dubai indefinitely. The court may order him to deposit security since there’s a chance he may not return to pay costs. 3. Failure to Furnish Security • If the plaintiff fails to deposit within time, the suit is dismissed. • The plaintiff may seek restoration of the suit by showing sufficient cause (illness, emergency, etc.). • Restoration is allowed only after notice to the defendant. 🔹 Order 26 & Section 75 CPC – Commissions A commission is an instruction issued by the court to a commissioner to perform tasks outside the court, aiding in proper adjudication. 1. Who Can Be Appointed as Commissioner? • Usually, advocates from a High Court-approved panel. • Must be independent, impartial, and skilled for the task. • Acts as the “eyes and ears” of the court but does not decide rights. 2. Purposes for Issuing Commission (Sec. 75 & Order 26 CPC) The court may issue a commission for: 1. Examining Witnesses – when a witness is ill, old, residing outside jurisdiction, or unable to attend (Order 26 Rules 1–8). 2. Local Investigation – to inspect property, verify possession, assess value, mesne profits, or damages (Rules 9–10). 3. Adjusting Accounts – in business or partnership disputes (Rules 11–12). 4. Partition of Property – after a preliminary decree, to divide property as per shares (Rules 13–14). 5. Scientific or Expert Investigation – handwriting, fingerprints, DNA, technical analysis (Rule 10-A). 6. Sale of Movable Property – when property in custody cannot be preserved (Rule 10-C). 7. Ministerial Acts – calculations, measurements, valuations (Rule 10-B). 3. Powers of the Commissioner (Rules 16–18) • Summon and examine witnesses. • Call for and examine documents. • Enter land/building mentioned in order. • Proceed ex parte if a party fails to appear. 4. Evidentiary Value of Commissioner’s Report • The report serves as prima facie evidence (Tushar Kanti v. Savitri Devi, 1996 SC). • It cannot be rejected without valid reasons but may be challenged with contrary evidence. 5. Limitations • Commissioner cannot perform judicial functions (e.g., deciding ownership or property value). • Cannot seize documents. • Only investigates and reports facts. 6. Commissions for Foreign Tribunals (Rules 19–22) High Courts can issue commissions for recording testimony in India on the request of a foreign tribunal. 🔹 Key Case Law • Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984) 3 SCC – Court emphasized the importance of commissions for social justice cases. • Tushar Kanti v. Savitri Devi (1996 SC) – Commissioner’s report is valid evidence unless proved otherwise.  Conclusion Orders 24, 25, and 26 of CPC collectively ensure: • Order 24 – Defendants can settle claims early, avoiding unnecessary litigation. • Order 25 – Defendants are protected from frivolous plaintiffs who may evade costs. • Order…

Read More “” »

Order 14 CPC (Framing of Issues) and Order 15 CPC (Disposal of Suits at First Hearing) The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed rules for the conduct of civil trials in India. Two important provisions are Order 14 (Framing of Issues) and Order 15 (Disposal of Suits at First Hearing), which ensure clarity, efficiency, and fairness in the judicial process. This article explains what issues are, how they are framed under Order 14 CPC, what preliminary issues mean, and how suits can be disposed of at the first hearing under Order 15 CPC. What is an Issue in CPC? An issue arises when one party affirms a material proposition of law or fact and the other party denies it. • Material propositions are those which a plaintiff must allege to show his right to sue or a defendant must allege to constitute his defence. • Thus, each material proposition affirmed by one party and denied by the other shall form the subject of a distinct issue. Types of Issues According to Order 14 Rule 1(4), issues are of two kinds: 1. Issues of fact 2. Issues of law Issues of Fact – Example Case: Suit for recovery of money • Plaintiff’s pleading: “The defendant borrowed ₹1,00,000 from me on 1 Jan 2025 and agreed to repay it by 31 March 2025.” • Defendant’s reply: “I never borrowed any money from the plaintiff.” ➡️ Issue framed: “Whether the defendant borrowed ₹1,00,000 from the plaintiff on 1 Jan 2025?” Issues of Law – Example Examples of legal issues: • Whether the court has jurisdiction? • Whether the suit is barred by limitation? • Whether the claim is barred under Res Judicata or Order 2 Rule 2? If a legal issue, when decided, can dispose of the suit, it becomes a preliminary issue. What is a Preliminary Issue? As per Order 14 Rule 2(2), a preliminary issue is an issue of law which, if decided, can dispose of the entire suit without going into a full trial. Examples of Preliminary Issues: 1. Whether the court has jurisdiction to try the suit? 2. Whether the suit is barred by limitation?  General Rule vs Exception • General Rule (Order 14 Rule 2(1)): The court must decide all issues (law and fact) together, even if the suit could be disposed of on a preliminary issue. • Exception (Rule 2(2)): The court may decide only preliminary issues first, but only if they relate to: 1. Jurisdiction of the court, or 2. A legal bar to the suit. After the 1976 Amendment: Courts cannot treat all legal issues as preliminary, except jurisdiction and legal bar, to prevent delay. Materials Considered in Framing Issues As per Order 14 Rules 1(5) & 3, the following materials are used for framing issues: 1. Plaint and Written Statement 2. Examination under Order 10 Rule 2 CPC 3. Answers to interrogatories 4. Allegations made on oath by parties or their pleaders 5. Contents of documents produced by either party 👉 The court can adjourn framing of issues for up to 7 days (1999 Amendment) and may also summon evidence for proper framing. Amendment and Striking Out of Issues • The court can amend issues or frame additional ones at any time before passing a decree (Order 14 Rule 5(1)). • It may strike out wrongly framed issues (Order 14 Rule 5(2)). Omission to Frame Issues Failure to frame an issue is not always fatal. If parties understood the matter in controversy and went to trial, omission will not vitiate the proceedings ( Kamleshwaram v. Subbarao, AIR 1963 SC 884). Order 15 CPC – Disposal of Suits at First Hearing Order 15 CPC deals with situations where the court can dispose of suits at the first hearing itself, without proceeding to a full trial. Cases where Court may Pronounce Judgment at Once 1. No dispute – When the parties are not at issue on any fact or law. 2. One defendant not at issue – Where one of the defendants is not at issue with the plaintiff. 3. After framing of issues – If the court finds no further evidence or argument is required. 4. Failure to produce evidence – Where summons was issued for final disposal and a party fails to produce evidence without sufficient cause. Conclusion The combined effect of Order 14 CPC and Order 15 CPC is to ensure that: • Only real disputes go to trial. • Cases involving no substantial controversy are disposed of quickly. • Courts save time by identifying preliminary issues (jurisdiction/legal bar) early on. Thus, these provisions strike a balance between fair trial and speedy justice, which is the very objective of the CPC. To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation  “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]