Adjournment Under CPC – Meaning, Rules, and Case Laws Explained Adjournment is a common feature in civil litigation but often criticized for causing delays in justice. To balance fairness with efficiency, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) under Order 17 lays down strict rules for granting adjournments. This article explains the meaning of adjournment, rules under Order 17 CPC, leading case laws, and valid vs invalid grounds for adjournment. What is Adjournment? Adjournment means postponing or suspending a court proceeding to another date or time.In simple words, when a hearing cannot continue on the scheduled date due to some reason, the court may grant a new date of hearing. Order 17 Rule 1 CPC – Maximum Number of Adjournments • The Court may grant adjournment only if sufficient cause is shown. • The reason must be recorded in writing by the court. • A party can get maximum three adjournments during the hearing of the suit. • This restriction was introduced by the Amendment Act, 1999. Case Law: • Salem Advocate Bar Association (II) v. Union of India (2005) – Supreme Court held that in extreme and exceptional circumstances, courts may relax the three-adjournment limit. Costs of Adjournment – Order 17 Rule 2 Whenever adjournment is granted: • The court must fix the next date of hearing. • The court may also impose costs on the party seeking adjournment. • If the adjournment was avoidable, heavier costs may be imposed. Special Rules under Order 17 Proviso 1. Continuous Hearing of Witnesses – Once examination of witnesses begins, hearings should continue day-to-day until completion. 2. No adjournment unless beyond control – Parties must show genuine and unavoidable reasons. 3. Lawyer busy in another court is NOT valid – This is no longer accepted as sufficient cause. 4. Lawyer’s sickness or unavailability – Court will see if another lawyer could be engaged. 5. Witness present but party/lawyer absent – The court may record witness testimony and proceed further. Order 17 Rule 2 – When Parties Fail to Appear If on an adjourned date, one or both parties fail to appear, the court may: • Proceed under Order 9 CPC (dismiss the suit or pass ex parte decree), or • Pass any other order it finds fit. Case Law: • Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal (AIR 1955 SC) – If a party was earlier present but fails to appear on a later date, the court has discretion under Order 17 Rule 2 to proceed ex parte or otherwise. Order 17 Rule 3 – When a Party Fails to Produce Evidence If a party, after getting time, fails to produce documents, witnesses, or perform required acts: • If both parties are present: Court may decide the case on merits. • If any party is absent: Court may proceed under Rule 2 (dismissal or ex parte). Valid Reasons for Granting Adjournment Courts have accepted adjournments in genuine circumstances, such as: • Sickness of party, lawyer, or witness (with medical proof). • Summons not served properly. • Need more time to prepare due to late documents. • Lawyer withdrawal at the last moment. • Emergency or hospitalization of counsel. • Inability to find new counsel immediately after withdrawal. Invalid Reasons – Adjournment Refused Courts reject adjournments when reasons are weak or used as delay tactics: • Lawyer busy in another court. • Lawyers’ strike. • Dilatory conduct or intentional delays. • Witness present but not examined. • Case is very old and pending. • Inconvenience to the opposite party. • Repeated excuses despite earlier commitments. Valid and Invalid Reasons for Adjournment Courts grant adjournments only when there is a genuine and unavoidable reason. For example, if the party, their lawyer, or a witness is seriously ill, or if summons have not been served properly, the court may allow time. Similarly, when a lawyer suddenly withdraws, when there is an emergency such as hospitalization, or when a party is unable to find a new counsel in time, adjournments have been considered valid. On the other hand, adjournments are refused when the grounds are weak, avoidable, or intended to delay the proceedings. A lawyer being busy in another court, lawyers going on strike, or a party deliberately engaging in dilatory conduct are not accepted. Likewise, if a witness is present but not examined, if the case is very old and pending for long, or if adjournment would cause inconvenience to the other side, the court will reject the request. Repeated excuses after earlier commitments to proceed are also treated as invalid reasons. Case Laws on Adjournment • Salem Advocate Bar Assn. (II) v. Union of India (2005) – Maximum three adjournments rule not absolute; exceptions allowed. • Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal (1955) – Court has discretion if party earlier appeared but absent later. • State of UP v. Shambhu Nath Singh (2001) – Courts must discourage unnecessary adjournments to ensure speedy justice. Conclusion Adjournments are meant to ensure fair trial and natural justice, but they must not become a tool for delaying proceedings. Under Order 17 CPC, courts can grant adjournments only for sufficient cause, and generally not more than three times. By imposing costs and discouraging invalid reasons, the judiciary ensures that justice is delivered both fairly and speedily. FAQs on Adjournment under CPC Q1. How many adjournments can be granted under CPC? 👉 Maximum three adjournments to a party during the hearing of the suit. Q2. Can adjournment be granted if a lawyer is busy in another case? 👉 No, this is not a valid reason anymore. Q3. What happens if a party is absent on adjourned date? 👉 Court may proceed under Order 9 CPC or pass any suitable order under Order 17 Rule 2. Q4. Can court impose costs for adjournment? 👉 Yes, the court can impose ordinary or heavy costs depending on circumstances. 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,…
Author: toahostinger
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]
Order 11 CPC: Discovery and Interrogatories under Civil Procedure Code Introduction In civil litigation, parties often need clarity about the opponent’s case. After the plaintiff files the plaint and the defendant files the written statement, it is sometimes unclear what facts or documents the other side is relying upon. To avoid surprises during trial, the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908 provides a mechanism called discovery under Order 11 CPC. Discovery ensures that both parties disclose relevant facts or documents beforehand, saving time, clarifying issues, and preventing injustice. Meaning of Discovery under CPC The term discovery is not explicitly defined in the CPC, but it generally means: • Compelling the opposite party to reveal facts or documents within their knowledge or possession, which are relevant to the dispute. • It is a form of compulsory pre-trial disclosure of information. Legal Basis of Discovery • Section 30 CPC – Empowers the court to order discovery. • Order 11 CPC – Provides the detailed procedure for discovery. Important Point: Discovery does not allow a party to know the evidence strategy of the opponent, as that could lead to misuse. Instead, it only allows disclosure of relevant facts and documents (facta probanda), not the evidence (facta probantia). Objectives of Discovery The main object of discovery is to: 1. Ascertain the real nature of the opponent’s case. 2. Prevent concealment of material facts. 3. Save time by reducing unnecessary evidence. 4. Support one’s own case or weaken the opponent’s case. Case Law: Raj Narain v. Indira Gandhi (1972 SC) – Discovery can be used either to support one’s case or to destroy the opponent’s case. Types of Discovery under CPC Discovery under Order 11 CPC is of two types: 1. Discovery by Interrogatories (Order 11 Rule 1–11) • One party sends written questions (called interrogatories) to the other party. • The other party must answer them on oath through affidavit. • Helps clarify facts and extract admissions. Example: “Did you receive ₹50,000 on 1 March 2023?” Key Rules: • Rule 1 – Leave of court required to serve interrogatories. • Rule 6 – Objections allowed if questions are irrelevant, scandalous, or mala fide. • Rule 7 – Court may strike out unreasonable or oppressive questions. • Rule 8 – Answers must be given within 10 days or within court’s time limit. • Rule 11 – Court can order answers through affidavit or oral examination. Special Rule: Interrogatories may be served on next friend/guardian in case of minors or persons of unsound mind (Rule 23). 2. Discovery of Documents (Order 11 Rule 12–21) • A party can request the court to order the opponent to disclose documents in their possession/control relating to the dispute. • Opponent must file an affidavit of documents listing relevant papers. • The court may allow inspection of such documents. Example: “Produce all invoices between Jan and March 2023.” Key Rules: • Rule 12 – Application for discovery of documents. • Rule 14 – Court may order production of documents at any stage. • Rule 20 – Discovery may be postponed if premature. • Rule 21 – Non-compliance → plaintiff’s suit may be dismissed or defendant’s defence struck off. Case Law: M.L. Sethi v. R.P. Kapur (1972) – Court can order discovery even if the document is not to be used as evidence, as long as it relates to the dispute. Documents Exempted from Discovery Not all documents can be ordered for discovery. Exemptions include: 1. Documents not admissible in evidence (e.g., unstamped documents). 2. Documents disclosing opponent’s evidence strategy. 3. Privileged documents under Evidence Act (Sections 123–124). 4. Discovery that is oppressive or irrelevant. Consequences of Non-Compliance (Rule 21 CPC) • If plaintiff defaults → suit may be dismissed, fresh filing barred. • If defendant defaults → defence may be struck off. Admission under Order 12 CPC Closely connected with discovery is the concept of admission under Order 12 CPC. • Section 58 of Evidence Act – Facts admitted need not be proved. • Order 12 CPC – Parties can admit facts or documents in pleadings or otherwise. Types of Admissions 1. Admission in pleadings (express or constructive). 2. Admission by agreement of parties. 3. Admission during court examination. 4. Admission on notice. Order 12 Rule 6 – Judgment on Admission • If there is a clear admission, the court can pass judgment without a full trial. • Case Law: Uttam Singh Duggal v. United Bank of India (2000) – Decree can be passed if claim is clearly admitted. Production of Documents under Order 13 CPC • Parties must produce original documents at/before settlement of issues. • Court can reject irrelevant documents (Rule 3). • Admitted documents must be endorsed by court (Rule 4). • Court can impound documents if risk of tampering exists (Rule 8). • Return of documents only after appeal is disposed or limitation expires (Rule 9). Affidavits under Order 19 CPC • An affidavit is a written, sworn statement of facts by a person (deponent). • Used mainly in interlocutory matters like injunctions, receivership, etc. • Must be verified properly, stating facts based on personal knowledge or source of information. Case Law: Barium Chemicals v. Company Law Board (1967) – Improper verification makes affidavit defective. Conclusion Order 11 CPC on Discovery and Interrogatories plays a vital role in ensuring transparency in civil litigation. It prevents surprises, clarifies issues, saves trial time, and ensures fairness. Along with Order 12 (Admissions), Order 13 (Production of Documents), and Order 19 (Affidavits), it strengthens the pre-trial procedure, making the judicial process efficient and effective. For law students, judiciary aspirants, and legal practitioners, understanding discovery is essential for mastering civil trial procedures. 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…
Order 10 CPC: Examination of Parties by Court Order 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) deals with the examination of parties by the court. The main purpose is to ascertain whether the allegations made in the pleadings are admitted or denied, and to clarify the real controversy between the parties before framing the issues. This provision plays a crucial role in reducing unnecessary litigation by: • Bringing clarity on admissions and denials. • Encouraging Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) under Section 89 CPC. • Saving judicial time by identifying disputes at an early stage. 🔹 First Hearing of the Suit The first hearing means the day when the court applies its mind to the pleadings of the parties to understand their contentions for the purpose of framing issues. Case Law: Siraj Ahmad v. Premnath (1993 SC) 🔹 Rule 1: Ascertainment of Admissions or Denials At the first hearing, the court shall orally examine the parties (or their pleaders) to know whether they admit or deny the allegations in the pleadings. • If pleadings are clear (properly traversed), the court need not invoke this rule. • If pleadings are vague, the court can examine the parties to record admissions or denials. Kapil Corepacks (P) Ltd. v. Harbans Lal (2010 SC) The Supreme Court held that Order 10 Rule 1 CPC is necessary only where the pleadings lack clarity in admissions and denials. 🔹 Rules 1A to 1C: ADR Provisions Inserted by the 2002 Amendment, these rules integrate Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into CPC through Section 89. Rule 1A – Direction for ADR After recording admissions and denials, the court directs the parties to opt for one ADR method: • Arbitration • Mediation • Lok Adalat • Judicial Settlement Rule 1B – Appearance Before ADR Forum Parties are bound to appear before the ADR authority once the court refers the matter. Rule 1C – If Conciliation Fails If the ADR authority feels settlement is not possible, the matter is referred back to the court for trial. Step-by-step Process: 1. Court records admissions & denials (Rule 1). 2. Court directs parties to choose ADR (Rule 1A). 3. Parties appear before ADR forum (Rule 1B). • If settled → decree passed. • If not settled → referred back to court (Rule 1C). 4. Court resumes trial. 🔹 Rule 2: Oral Examination of Party • The court may orally examine any party or any person accompanying them to clarify matters in controversy. • This rule is broader than Rule 1 as it is not confined to admissions or denials. • It can be invoked at any stage of the hearing. • Not conducted on oath and is not a substitute for cross-examination. 🔹 Rule 3: Substance of Examination The judge must reduce the examination into writing and it shall form part of the record. 🔹 Rule 4: Consequence of Refusal to Answer If a pleader or party refuses or is unable to answer material questions: • Court may adjourn the hearing (max 7 days) and direct the party to appear personally. • If the party still fails to appear, the court may pass judgment against them or take other suitable action. 🔹 Section 89 CPC and ADR Purpose of Section 89 CPC Introduced in 1999 to reduce judicial backlog by encouraging settlement outside court. Modes of ADR under Section 89: • Arbitration • Conciliation / Mediation • Lok Adalat • Judicial Settlement 🔹 Landmark Case: Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (2010 SC) The Supreme Court clarified the interpretation of Section 89 CPC: • Judges are not required to draft settlement terms before referring cases to ADR. • Courts only need to identify if the case is suitable for ADR. • Referral to ADR is mandatory for the court to consider, but not mandatory in unsuitable cases. Cases Suitable for ADR • Commercial & contractual disputes. • Matrimonial & family matters. • Landlord-tenant & partnership disputes. • Consumer disputes. Cases Not Suitable for ADR • Representative suits (Order 1 Rule 8 CPC). • Election disputes. • Probate & administration cases. • Fraud, forgery, coercion-related cases. 🔹 Mediation Act 2023 and Section 89 The Mediation Act, 2023 amended Section 89 CPC by: • Removing the requirement for courts to draft settlement terms. • Aligning ADR terminology properly. • Bringing law in line with Afcons judgment. 🔹 Conclusion Order 10 CPC ensures that before the trial begins, the court clarifies what is admitted and denied, and explores the possibility of settlement through ADR under Section 89 CPC. • If settlement succeeds → decree is passed. • If it fails → trial resumes. This system reduces unnecessary litigation, saves judicial time, and encourages amicable resolution of disputes. ✓ In short, Order 10 CPC is not just about framing issues but about promoting speedy justice through ADR. ∆ 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]
Order 8 CPC – Written Statement, Set-off and Counterclaim Explained The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) governs civil proceedings in India. One of its most important provisions is Order 8 CPC, which deals with the written statement, set-off, and counterclaim filed by the defendant in response to the plaintiff’s plaint. This article provides a comprehensive guide to Order 8 CPC, covering rules, requirements, case laws, format, and distinctions between set-off and counterclaim. What is a Written Statement under Order 8 CPC? A written statement is the pleading of the defendant in response to the allegations made by the plaintiff in the plaint. • It contains admissions, denials, legal objections, and sometimes new facts in favor of the defendant. • All the general rules of pleadings apply to a written statement. ✓ In short, the written statement is the defendant’s side of the story. When Should a Written Statement be Filed? (Order 8 Rule 1 CPC) • The defendant must file the written statement within 30 days from the date of service of summons. • The court may extend this period up to 90 days, but not as a routine matter. Case Laws • Kailash v. Nankhu (2005 SC): The 90-day limit is directory, not mandatory. • Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India (2005 SC): Court has discretion to extend beyond 90 days in exceptional cases. ✓ However, courts discourage unnecessary delays to avoid defeating the purpose of speedy trials. Format of a Written Statement A written statement usually follows this format: • Court name • Parties (Plaintiff vs Defendant) • Admissions and denials (point-wise reply to plaint) • Additional pleas (new facts or defenses) • Prayer for dismissal of suit • Verification and signature by defendant and advocate Order 8 Rule 1A – Duty of Defendant to Produce Documents If the defendant relies on any document, he must: 1. List such documents in writing, 2. Submit originals and copies with the written statement, 3. Mention where the document is if not in his possession, 4. Failing which, he cannot use the document later (unless permitted by the court). Exceptions • Cross-examination documents, • Documents used only to refresh memory. Example: If Defendant B claims he already repaid ₹3 lakh to Plaintiff A and has a receipt, he must file that receipt with his written statement. Order 8 Rule 2 – New Facts Must be Specially Pleaded The defendant must clearly plead new facts like: • Limitation (time-barred claim), • Fraud or illegality, • Payment already made, • Contract already performed, • Release from liability. This ensures no surprise defense during trial and that the plaintiff knows the real issues. Order 8 Rules 3 to 5 – Specific Denial • Defendant must specifically deny each allegation. • General denials are not enough. • If a fact is not specifically denied, it is deemed to be admitted. Example: • Plaintiff: “Defendant borrowed ₹1,00,000 on 1st Jan 2023.” • Defendant (wrong denial): “I deny the allegations.” • Defendant (correct denial): “I deny borrowing ₹1,00,000 or any other amount from the plaintiff on 1st Jan 2023 or on any date.” Set-Off under Order 8 Rule 6 CPC A set-off means adjusting a mutual debt against the plaintiff’s claim. Conditions for Set-Off 1. Plaintiff’s suit must be for money recovery, 2. Amount must be ascertained, 3. Must be legally recoverable, 4. Between the same parties in the same legal character, 5. Must not exceed the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction. Types of Set-Off 1. Legal Set-Off – For ascertained sums, claimed as a matter of right. 2. Equitable Set-Off (Order 20 Rule 19(3)) – For unascertained sums, arising from the same transaction, allowed at the discretion of the court. Case Law: Harishchandra Dwarkadas v. Firm Murlidhar (1957) – Even if plaintiff’s suit fails, the defendant’s valid set-off can still be decreed. Counterclaim under Order 8 Rules 6A–6G CPC A counterclaim is the defendant’s own claim against the plaintiff, filed along with the written statement. Features of Counterclaim • Can be for any cause of action, not just money. • May arise from the same transaction or different transaction. • Must arise before filing the written statement. • Treated like a cross-suit. Examples • Plaintiff sues for injunction, defendant counterclaims for possession. • Plaintiff sues for defamation damages, defendant counterclaims for his own defamation damages. ✓ Even if plaintiff withdraws his suit, the counterclaim survives and can be decided on merits. Distinction Between Set-Off and Counterclaim The distinction between a set-off and a counterclaim is important under the Code of Civil Procedure. A set-off is in the nature of a defensive plea, where the defendant seeks to adjust a specific, ascertained sum of money against the plaintiff’s claim. It is permitted only in suits for recovery of money, provided the claim is legally recoverable, arises out of the same transaction, and falls within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court. The Supreme Court in Union of India v. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (1969) explained that a set-off is limited in scope and operates as a shield. In contrast, a counterclaim is much wider in scope and is treated as a cross-suit. It allows the defendant not only to resist the plaintiff’s claim but also to enforce his own independent cause of action against the plaintiff. Unlike set-off, a counterclaim need not arise from the same transaction and is not confined to money claims; it may extend to damages, possession, declaration, or injunction, provided the cause of action accrued before the filing of the written statement. The Supreme Court in Kailash v. Nankhu (2005) emphasized that counterclaims ensure comprehensive adjudication by avoiding multiple suits. Moreover, in Laxmidas v. Nanabhai (1964) it was held that a counterclaim can survive even if the plaintiff’s suit is withdrawn or dismissed. Thus, while a set-off is restricted to a defensive adjustment of monetary claims, a counterclaim is both defensive and offensive in nature, enabling the defendant to obtain a decree…
Order 7 of CPC: Plaint – A Complete Guide Order 7 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, deals with plaints – the written statement by which a civil suit is initiated in court. The plaint is the foundation of any civil case and must be drafted carefully, as it determines how the court will proceed with the matter. In this article, we will cover the meaning, essential requirements, and detailed rules under Order 7 CPC along with relevant case law, so you can understand how a plaint works in practice. What is a Plaint? A plaint is the written document filed by the plaintiff in a civil court, stating the facts of the case, cause of action, relief sought, and other particulars. It is the starting point of every civil suit and must comply with the rules of Order 7 CPC. If a plaint does not meet these requirements, the court may either return or reject it. Rule 1: Particulars of a Plaint Every plaint must contain certain basic details, including: • The name of the court where the suit is filed. • The name, description, and residence of the plaintiff. • The name, description, and residence of the defendant. • Statement if any party is a minor or of unsound mind. • The facts constituting the cause of action and the date it arose. • Facts showing why the court has jurisdiction. • The relief claimed by the plaintiff. • Statement of the value of the subject matter for jurisdiction and court fees. ✓ In short, the plaint must tell the court who is suing whom, for what reason, and what relief is being sought. Rule 2: Money Suits When a plaintiff seeks recovery of money, the plaint must state the exact amount claimed. • If the amount is fixed and known, the precise figure should be mentioned. • If the amount is uncertain (like mesne profits, unsettled accounts, or debts that cannot be calculated exactly), the plaint should mention an approximate value. Rule 3: Suits Relating to Immovable Property If the dispute concerns land or property, the plaint must describe the property in a way that it can be easily identified. This includes boundaries, survey numbers, or landmarks. Minor errors in description will not invalidate the plaint, as long as the property can be clearly understood by the defendant and the court. Rule 4: Representative Suits When a plaintiff files a suit in a representative capacity (for example, an executor of a will or a legal heir), the plaint must show that: 1. The plaintiff has a legal interest in the matter. 2. All legal formalities (such as probate in case of a will) have been completed. Rule 5: Defendant’s Interest and Liability The plaint must explain how the defendant is connected to the dispute and why he is liable to respond to the plaintiff’s claim. Rule 6: Grounds of Exemption from Limitation If a suit is filed after the limitation period, the plaint must include valid reasons for seeking exemption. Courts may accept such grounds if they are legally justified and not inconsistent with the plaint’s facts. Rule 7: Specific Relief The plaintiff must clearly state the relief claimed in the plaint. Relief may include: • Damages (compensation) • Possession of property • Declaration of rights • Injunction (to stop or prevent an act) • Specific performance of a contract The plaintiff may also seek alternative relief, in case the main relief is not granted. Rule 8: Separate Grounds of Relief If the plaintiff seeks multiple and distinct reliefs based on separate causes of action, they must be stated separately and clearly. Rule 9: Procedure After Admission of Plaint Once the court admits the plaint, the plaintiff must file copies of the plaint for each defendant within 7 days, along with requisite court fees. Rule 10: Return of Plaint A plaint is returned when the court finds it has no jurisdiction to hear the case. This may be due to: • Territorial jurisdiction, • Pecuniary jurisdiction, or • Subject-matter jurisdiction. The court endorses the date of presentation, date of return, reason for return, and name of the person taking it back. ✓ The plaintiff can then file it in the appropriate court. Rule 10-A & 10-B: Procedure Before and During Return If the court decides to return a plaint, it must first notify the plaintiff. The plaintiff can request the court to fix a date of appearance in the proper court. Even appellate courts (like High Courts) can return plaints if they find the original court lacked jurisdiction. Rule 11: Rejection of Plaint A plaint can be rejected in the following cases: 1. If it does not disclose a cause of action. 2. If the relief claimed is undervalued and not corrected within time. 3. If the plaint is insufficiently stamped and the defect is not rectified. 4. If the suit is barred by law on the face of the plaint. 5. If it is not filed in duplicate. 6. If Rule 9 requirements are not complied with. Important distinction: • Rejection of plaint is on technical grounds – the plaintiff may file again. • Dismissal of suit is on merits – a fresh suit cannot be filed. Rules 12 & 13: Effect and Procedure of Rejection When a plaint is rejected, the court passes an order with reasons. The plaintiff is not barred from filing a fresh plaint on the same cause of action, subject to limitation. Rules 14 to 17: Documents to be Filed with Plaint The plaintiff must file all relevant documents with the plaint (e.g., agreements, receipts, letters). If not filed, they cannot be used later unless the court permits. Exceptions: • Documents used for cross-examination. • Documents shown only to refresh a witness’s memory. Difference Between Return and Rejection of Plaint • Return of plaint – Filed in the wrong court, but can be…
Order 6 CPC – Pleadings (Complete Guide with Rules, Cases & Amendments Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed rules regarding pleadings under Order VI. Pleadings form the backbone of any civil suit, as they define the scope of the dispute, inform each party about the case of the other, and help the court in determining the issues. In this article, we will cover: • Meaning of pleadings • Objects and importance • Rules of pleadings under Order 6 CPC • Amendment of pleadings (Order 6 Rule 17) • Important case laws and exam-oriented points What is Pleading? (Order 6 Rule 1 CPC) According to CPC, pleadings mean plaint or written statement. • Plaint → Filed by the plaintiff stating his cause of action. • Written Statement → Filed by the defendant stating his defence. Extended pleadings may also include: • Counterclaim (Order 8 Rule 6A CPC) • Set-off (Order 8 Rule 6 CPC) • Replication → Plaintiff’s reply to WS (with court’s permission) • Rejoinder → Defendant’s reply to replication (rare; requires permission) Object of Pleadings The Supreme Court in Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram, AIR 1978 SC explained the objectives of pleadings: 1. To give notice of each party’s case to the other. 2. To avoid surprises during trial. 3. To help the court determine real issues in dispute. 4. To save time, expenses, and avoid unnecessary delays. ✓ Rules of Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 2 CPC) Pleadings must comply with the following principles: 1. Facts, not law – Parties must state only material facts, not legal principles. 2. Material facts only – Only those facts on which the claim or defence rests. 3. No evidence in pleadings – Evidence should not be included. (Case: Virendra Nath v. Satpal Singh, 2007 SC) • Facta Probanda = Facts required to be proved → Must be pleaded. • Facta Probantia = Evidence to prove facts → Should not be pleaded. 4. Concise form – Pleadings should be brief and precise. 5. Paragraphs and numbers – Allegations must be divided into consecutively numbered paragraphs. 6. Dates and sums – To be mentioned in both words and figures. ✓ Particulars in Special Cases (Order 6 Rule 4 CPC) • In cases of fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence, breach of trust, or willful default, full particulars must be stated. • Example: Simply saying “B committed fraud” is not enough → Details must be given. • Raja Ram v. Jai Prakash Singh (2019 SC): In fraud and undue influence, specific particulars are mandatory. Other Important Rules of Pleadings • Order 6 Rule 6 – Condition precedent: If a condition precedent is disputed, it must be specifically pleaded. Otherwise, court presumes it fulfilled. • Order 6 Rule 7 – No departure: No party can introduce inconsistent pleadings unless amended. • Order 6 Rule 8 – Denial of contract: Mere denial means denial of fact, not legality. • Order 6 Rule 9 – Effect of document: Only mention the effect, not entire contents. • Order 6 Rule 10 – Malice, fraud, knowledge: It’s enough to state them as facts. • Order 6 Rule 11 – Notice: Only allege notice was given unless its terms are material. • Order 6 Rule 14 – Signing: Must be signed by party & lawyer. • Order 6 Rule 15 – Verification: Verification at foot of pleading with affidavit. Amendment of Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 17 CPC) The court may allow either party to alter or amend pleadings at any stage, provided: • The amendment is necessary to decide the real dispute. • It does not cause injustice to the opposite party. Proviso (2002 Amendment) No amendment after commencement of trial unless despite due diligence, it could not be raised earlier. When Allowed • To avoid multiplicity of suits. • To correct mistake in parties’ names. • To add omitted properties by mistake. • Clarifications in cause of action. • New facts due to changed circumstances. When Refused • When amendment changes entire nature of the suit. • When it takes away a legal right (e.g., limitation). • When sought in bad faith. (Andhra Bank v. ABN AMRO, 2007 SC) • When inconsistent or destructive of earlier pleadings. (Usha Balasaheb Swamy v. Kiran Appaso Swamy, 2007 SC) Doctrine of Relation Back Amendments generally relate back to the date of original pleading, but courts have discretion. Striking Out Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 16 CPC) Court may strike out pleadings if: 1. They are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. 2. They prejudice or delay fair trial. 3. They are abuse of court process. Case Laws on Pleadings • Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram (1978 SC) – Object of pleadings. • Virendra Nath v. Satpal Singh (2007 SC) – Facta Probanda vs Facta Probantia. • Raja Ram v. Jai Prakash Singh (2019 SC) – Fraud and undue influence must be pleaded with particulars. • Kisandas v. Rachappa Vithoba (1909 Bom) – Test for amendment. • Usha Balasaheb Swamy v. Kiran Appaso Swamy (2007 SC) – Inconsistent amendments not allowed. FAQs on Order 6 CPC Q1. What are pleadings under CPC? Pleadings mean plaint and written statement (Order 6 Rule 1). Q2. Can pleadings include evidence? No, pleadings must contain only material facts, not evidence. Q3. Can pleadings be amended? Yes, under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, with court’s permission, subject to conditions. Q4. What happens if pleadings contain scandalous or frivolous matter? Court may strike them out under Order 6 Rule 16. Q5. Is amendment allowed after trial begins? Only if party proves that despite due diligence, it could not have been raised earlier. Conclusion Order 6 CPC lays down detailed rules regarding pleadings, ensuring clarity, fairness, and efficiency in civil proceedings. Parties must strictly follow these principles, as courts decide cases based on pleadings and not on arguments outside them. Understanding Order 6 CPC (Pleadings) is crucial for law students, civil lawyers, and judiciary aspirants, as it is one of the most frequently tested topics in exams and forms the…
Summons under CPC:- Meaning, Essentials, Types, and Service of Summons Summons form the foundation of natural justice in civil procedure. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), a defendant must be informed about the legal proceedings filed against him. This intimation, known as a summons, ensures that no person is condemned unheard in line with the principle of audi alteram partem. If a defendant is not duly served with summons, any decree passed against him will not bind him. Therefore, proper issue and service of summons are crucial in civil proceedings. ∆ Meaning of Summons When a plaintiff files a suit, the court issues a notice to the defendant informing him: • That a suit has been filed against him, and • That he is required to appear before the court to defend himself. This notice is called a summons. It is not just a formality but a legal requirement to ensure fairness. Legal Provisions Related to Summons • Section 27 CPC – Issue of summons within 30 days of filing the suit. • Section 28 CPC – Service of summons in another State. • Section 29 CPC – Service of foreign summons in India. • Section 30 CPC – Powers of the court to issue summons, order documents, or affidavits. • Section 32 CPC – Consequences of ignoring summons (arrest, property attachment, fine, or civil prison). Additionally: • Order 5 CPC – Summons to defendants. • Order 16 CPC – Summons to witnesses. ✓ Essentials of a Valid Summons (Order 5 Rules 1–2) 1. Must be signed by the Judge or authorised officer. 2. Must bear the seal of the Court. 3. Must be accompanied by a copy of the plaint. 4. Must be in the prescribed form under Appendix B of CPC. Types of Summons under CPC Under Order 5 CPC, summons may be issued for different purposes: 1. Summons for Settlement of Issues • Order 5 Rule 1(1) • Defendant is called to file a written statement and submit supporting documents. 2. Summons for Final Disposal of Suit • Order 5 Rule 5 • Defendant must appear prepared with witnesses and evidence for final hearing. 3. Summons for Personal Appearance Only • Order 5 Rule 3 • Defendant must appear personally if ordered by the Court. ✓ Service of Summons (Order 5 Rules 9–30) 1. Service through Court [Rule 9] • By court officer, registered post, courier, email, or other communication methods. • Refusal of summons = deemed valid service. 2. Service by Plaintiff (Dasti Summons) [Rule 9-A] • Court may allow plaintiff to serve summons personally. 3. Personal/Direct Service [Rules 10–16, 18] • Served to the defendant, his agent, or adult family member (not servant). • Must be acknowledged by the recipient. 4. Substituted Service [Rules 17, 19–20] When defendant avoids service or cannot be located: • By affixing notice on the outer door of his house. • By publishing in a local daily newspaper. • By pasting in a conspicuous place in the court. • Substituted service = as effective as personal service. 5. Service by Post • If sent by registered post to the correct address, it is deemed valid even without acknowledgment. 6. Special Situations • Defendant outside India → Service by post, courier, fax, or email (Order 5 Rule 25). • Defendant in jail → Summons to be served on the officer in charge of prison (Order 5 Rule 29). Case Laws on Service of Summons • State of J & K v. H. W. Mohammed, AIR 1972 SC 2538 – Proper compliance with Order 5 Rule 19 is necessary for valid service. • Basant Singh v. Roman Catholic Mission, AIR 2002 SC 3557 – Substituted service through widely circulated newspaper is valid even if not the exact paper ordered. • Sunil Poddar v. Union Bank of India (2008) 2 SCC 326 – Service by advertisement in newspaper is effective even if defendant does not read that newspaper. • Prabhin Ram Pukhan v. State of Assam, (2015) 3 SCC 605 – Irregularity in summons is not fatal unless substantial prejudice is caused. Consequences of Non-Appearance after Summons Under Section 32 CPC, if a person ignores a valid summons, the Court may: • Issue a warrant of arrest, • Attach and sell his property, • Impose a fine up to ₹5,000, • Demand security for appearance, or • Commit him to civil prison. ∆ Key Takeaways • Summons ensure fair hearing and natural justice. • Must be properly issued and served under CPC rules. • Various modes of service exist, including personal, postal, electronic, and substituted service. • Non-compliance with summons can attract serious consequences. Conclusion Summons under CPC play a vital role in safeguarding the principles of justice, equity, and fair trial. Without proper service of summons, civil proceedings cannot move forward. Therefore, both litigants and courts must ensure that summons are issued, served, and acknowledged in accordance with law. ✓ 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]
Order 2 CPC – Frame of Suit: Meaning, Rules, Case Laws & Illustrations The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed rules for filing civil suits in India. Order 2 CPC deals with the “Frame of Suit” and ensures that a plaintiff includes the whole of his claim in one suit to prevent multiple litigations on the same cause of action. This article provides a comprehensive explanation of Order 2 CPC, including its objectives, rules, illustrations, case laws, and practical examples. Objectives of Order 2 CPC The main purpose of Order 2 CPC is to: • Prevent multiplicity of proceedings. • Avoid harassment of the defendant. • Save time of the court. • Reduce unnecessary expenses in litigation. 1. Frame of Suit (Rule 1) Every suit must be framed in such a way that: • It allows the court to reach a final decision on the dispute. • It prevents future litigation on the same issues. 2. Suit to Include the Whole Claim (Order 2 Rule 2 CPC) (1) Whole Claim A plaintiff must include the entire claim arising from a cause of action. However, he may relinquish part of the claim to bring the suit within the jurisdiction of a lower court. (2) Relinquishment of Claim If the plaintiff omits or intentionally relinquishes a portion of the claim, he cannot file a fresh suit for the same later. (3) Omission of Reliefs If a plaintiff is entitled to multiple reliefs from the same cause of action, he must claim all of them together. If he omits one without the leave of court, he is barred from suing for it later. Explanation: An obligation and its collateral security, or successive claims under the same obligation, are treated as one cause of action. Illustrations under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC 1. If rent of three years is due but plaintiff sues only for one year → He cannot later sue for the remaining years. 2. If a loan is ₹2200 but plaintiff sues for ₹2000 to stay within jurisdiction → He cannot later sue for ₹200. 3. If a defendant has a right of set-off but does not use it fully → He cannot file a fresh suit for the balance. 4. A suit dismissed on one ground does not always bar another suit based on a different cause of action (e.g., redemption of mortgage after eviction case). Meaning of “Cause of Action” • Refers to essential facts giving the plaintiff the right to sue. • Example: Sale of goods + non-payment = cause of action. • Same cause of action → bar applies. • Different cause of action → bar does not apply. Case Laws on Order 2 Rule 2 CPC • Gurbux Singh v. Bhooralal (1964 SC): Rule is penal in nature and must be applied strictly. • Arjun Lal v. Mriganka Mohan (1975 SC): Rule applies only if both suits are based on the same cause of action. • Union of India v. Firm Baijnath Govind Das (1955 ALJ 597): One contract with two breaches → only one suit will lie. • Deva Ram v. Ishwar Chand (1996 SC): Different causes of action (recovery of sale price vs possession of land) → fresh suit is allowed. Splitting Claim vs Splitting Relief • Splitting Claim: First suit for part payment, second suit for balance → Bar applies. • Splitting Relief: First suit for specific performance, second suit for damages (without leave) → Bar applies. • Different Cause of Action: First suit for rent, second for eviction based on ownership → No bar. 3. Joinder of Causes of Action (Order 2 Rules 3–6) Rule 3 – Joinder Permitted A plaintiff may join multiple causes of action in one suit, subject to CPC provisions. Types of Joinder: 1. One Plaintiff vs One Defendant – Multiple claims (e.g., loan recovery, rent, breach of contract). 2. Multiple Plaintiffs & Causes of Action – Allowed if: • Claims arise from same transaction, and • Common questions of law/fact exist. 3. One Plaintiff vs Multiple Defendants – Allowed if: • Based on same transaction, and • Common questions of law/fact exist. Otherwise, it is misjoinder or multifariousness. 4. Multiple Plaintiffs vs Multiple Defendants – Allowed only if all are jointly interested. Rule 6 – Court’s Discretion The court may separate trials if joinder causes confusion, delay, or inconvenience. 4. Rule 4 – Certain Claims with Immovable Property Claims for possession of immovable property may be joined with: • Mesne profits / arrears of rent. • Damages for breach of contract. • Any claim arising from the same cause of action. Special Note: In mortgage suits, possession may also be claimed. 5. Rule 7 – Objections on Misjoinder • Objections must be raised at the earliest stage. • Otherwise, they are deemed waived. • Misjoinder not affecting merits or jurisdiction cannot be a ground for reversal of decree. Applicability • Order 2 CPC applies only to civil suits. • It does not apply to appeals, execution proceedings, arbitration, or writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Conclusion Order 2 CPC plays a crucial role in civil litigation by ensuring that all claims and reliefs arising from the same cause of action are included in one suit. It prevents splitting of claims, saves judicial time, and protects defendants from repeated harassment. However, the rule is penal in nature and must be applied strictly, as held in various Supreme Court judgments. ✓ For law students and judiciary aspirants, Order 2 CPC (Frame of Suit) is an important topic, especially in understanding the concept of cause of action, splitting of claims, and joinder of causes of action. 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…
Order 1 CPC – Parties to Suit: Joinder, Non-Joinder, and Representative Suits Order 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 deals with the rules regarding parties to a suit. It lays down who can be joined as plaintiffs or defendants, when parties must be added, and how the court ensures effective adjudication. The objective is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, reduce expenses, and make sure all necessary parties are present before the court. Joinder of Parties under Order 1 CPC The concept of joinder of parties arises when: • An act is done by two or more persons together, or • An act affects two or more persons together. There are two kinds of joinder under Order 1 CPC: 1. Joinder of Plaintiffs (Order 1 Rule 1) All persons may be joined as plaintiffs if: • Their right to relief arises out of the same act or transaction (whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative), and • If they filed separate suits, common questions of law or fact would arise. Example: If A assaults B and C in the same incident, both B and C can join as plaintiffs in one suit. Counter Example: If A has four separate contracts with B, C, D, and E, they cannot jointly sue A, because each has a separate cause of action. 2. Joinder of Defendants (Order 1 Rule 3) Multiple persons can be joined as defendants if: • The right to relief arises out of the same act or transaction, and • Common questions of law or fact would arise if separate suits were filed. Example: If A suffers injury due to the negligence of both a bus driver (B) and a car driver (C), A can sue both together in one suit. Moreover, under Order 1 Rule 7, if the plaintiff is unsure who is liable, he can sue multiple defendants in the alternative and leave the decision to the court. Power of Court to Order Separate Trials Even if conditions for joinder are satisfied, the court may order separate trials under: • Order 1 Rule 2 – for plaintiffs (court may ask them to make an “election” who continues in the suit). • Order 1 Rule 3A – for defendants (court may separate trials, but defendants cannot “opt out” themselves). This ensures that joinder does not cause embarrassment, confusion, or delay in proceedings. Necessary and Proper Parties Order 1 CPC distinguishes between: • Necessary Party → Without whom no effective decree can be passed. • Proper Party → Whose presence is not essential but is helpful for complete adjudication. In Ramesh Hirachand Kundanmal v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (1992), the Supreme Court held that two conditions must exist for a necessary party: 1. There must be a right to relief against such party, and 2. No effective order can be passed without him. Example: In a dispossession case against C, if A and B are joint owners, both must be parties. Without B, the decree would be ineffective. Non-Joinder and Misjoinder of Parties • Non-joinder → Failure to include a necessary or proper party. • Misjoinder → Inclusion of a party who does not satisfy the requirements of Order 1 Rule 1 or 3. ✓ According to Order 1 Rule 9, a suit will not be defeated merely due to misjoinder or non-joinder, except when a necessary party is not joined. • Order 1 Rule 13 mandates objections be raised at the earliest stage. • Section 99 CPC prevents reversal of decrees on appeal due to misjoinder/non-joinder, except in the case of a necessary party. Thus, non-joinder of a necessary party is fatal, but misjoinder or non-joinder of proper parties does not affect the decree. Addition, Substitution, and Transposition of Parties (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC) The court has wide powers under Order 1 Rule 10 to add, strike out, substitute, or transpose parties at any stage of the proceedings, including the appellate stage. • Substitution: If the wrong person has been made plaintiff by mistake. • Addition: If a necessary party is missing. • Transposition: A pro forma defendant can be shifted as a plaintiff if justice requires. In Razia Begum v. Sahebzadi Anwar Begum (1958), the Supreme Court held that substitution or addition may be allowed at any stage if it is necessary for the complete adjudication of the dispute. Representative Suits under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC A representative suit allows one or more persons to sue or defend on behalf of a larger group having the same interest in the matter. The conditions are: 1. The parties must be numerous. 2. They must have the same interest. 3. Court’s permission is necessary. 4. Notice must be issued to all persons being represented. The purpose is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and ensure effective adjudication. In T.N. Housing Board v. T.N. Ganapathy (1990), the Supreme Court held that even if each allottee received a separate notice, a representative suit was valid since the grievance (excess demand) was common to all. • Binding Effect: The decision binds all represented persons through res judicata. • Withdrawal/Compromise: Cannot be done without court’s permission and notice to all concerned (Order 23 Rule 3B). • Substitution: If a representative is negligent, the court may substitute him with another member of the same group. Conclusion Order 1 CPC plays a crucial role in civil litigation by determining who should or may be made a party to the suit. It ensures that necessary parties are included, prevents unnecessary multiplicity of suits, and provides for representative actions where large groups are affected by the same issue. Provisions relating to non-joinder, misjoinder, and representative suits strike a balance between judicial efficiency and fairness. By giving the court wide discretion in adding or removing parties, Order 1 strengthens the justice delivery system and ensures that disputes are adjudicated completely and effectively. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on…