EDITED BY – KIRTEE KAMAL DAS

LLB 4th SEMESTER (2022 batch)

UNIVERSITY LAW COLLEGE, GAUHATI UNIVERSITY

2017

Civil Procedure Code & Limitation Act

Paper: 4-2

Full Marks: 80

Time: Three hours

The figures in the margin indicate full marks for the questions.

1. Fill in the blanks with appropriate answer given in the brackets: 1×10=10

(a) Set-off for unascertained sum of money is____________ (not permissible/permissible as equitable
set-off)

Ans: Permissible as equitable set-off.

(b) The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is____________ (special procedural law/ general procedural law)

Ans: General procedural law.

(c) The Court on being satisfied of the fact of minority of the defendant has to appoint____________
(guardian ad litem/legal guardian)

Ans: Guardian ad litem.

(d) In interpleader suit, the real dispute is between the____________ (the plaintiffs/defendants)

Ans: Defendants.

(e) In an appeal, the respondent may file cross-objection in the form of____________ (Memorandum of
appeal as far as applicable/an application)

Ans: Memorandum of appeal as far as applicable

(f) The law of limitation is____________ in operation. (prospective/retrospective)

Ans: Retrospective
(g) ____________ is an exception to the general rule that "Law of Limitation" bars the remedy only but
does not extinguish the right. (Right to property/Breach of contract)

Ans: Right to property

(h) ____________ means any person against whom a decree has been passed or an order capable of
execution has been made. (Decree holder/Judgment- debtor)

Ans: Decree holder

(i) ____________ relates to crimes and punishes offenders. (Civil jurisdiction/Criminal jurisdiction)

Ans: Criminal jurisdiction

(j) ____________ means a case already decided. (Res subjudice/Res judicata)

Ans: Res Judicata

2. Explain the following terms: 2×5=10

(a) Particulars

Ans: The plaint in CPC must provide all the necessary particulars about these parties, including their
names, residences, father's names, ages and any other details required for identification. If there are
multiple parties, their names should be mentioned according to their respective roles in the case.

(b) Mesne Profits

Ans: Mesne profits are nothing more than a fee that a person in unlawful possession of another’s
property must pay to the owner of the property for such wrongful occupation. Section 2(12) of the Civil
Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) defines mesne profit.

As per Section 2(12) of CPC, mesne profits of property mean those profits which the person in wrongful
possession of such property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received therefrom,
together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the
person in wrongful possession.It is a compensation paid to the real owner.

(c) Next friend of a minor

Ans: The 'next friend' is any person who has attained majority and is in some way related to the minor
so as to ascertain his/her interests. The 'next friend' will act on behalf of the minor in suits or
proceedings before the court and, in a bonafide manner, represent his/her interests.

(d) Summons

Ans: The word ‘summon’ has not been defined anywhere in the code. The definition of summons as
given by the Oxford dictionary states that, “a document which is issued from the court of justice and
calls upon a person to whom it is directed, to be present before a judge or court for a specific reason is
called a summon.” Issue and service of summons are given under Order 5 of the Code.

(e) Matter in issue.

Ans: The expression matter in issue means the rights litigated between the parties, i.e., the facts on
which the right is claimed and the law applicable to the determination of that issue. Such issue may be
an issue of fact, issue of law or mixed issue of law and fact.

3. Discuss the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure dealing with jurisdiction of Courts. 12

Ans: Introduction

Jurisdiction has not been explained in the Code of Civil Procedure. In simple words, it can be described
as the power of the court to settle the matter. The Indian Judiciary has invoked the ancient legal maxim
‘Ubi jus Ibi Remedium’, which means that where there is a right there is a remedy. The judicial forum
must have jurisdiction to deal with the matter. Hence, the Jurisdiction commonly rests where the crime
is committed.

Meaning of jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is defined as the limit of judicial authority or extent to which a court of law can exercise its
authority over suits, cases, appeals etc. A 1921 Calcutta High Court judgement in the case of Hriday Nath
Roy Vs Ram Chandra sought to explain the meaning of the term ‘Jurisdiction’ in detail. An investigation
of the cases in the texts shows several attempts to explain the word Jurisdiction which has been
declared to be the power to hear and determine the issues of law and the fact or the authority by which
their judicial powers take knowledge of facts and decide causes or the authority to hear and decide the
legal dispute or the power to hear and determine the subject matter in the dispute among the parties to
a suit and to adjudicate or exercise any judicial power over them or the ability to hear, determine and
declare judgement on issues before the court or the power or authority which is given to a court by
government to understand and learn causes between parties and to give a judgement into the effect or
the power to enquire into the facts to apply the

Jurisdiction of civil court

Section 9 of CPC

Section 9 of the Code of Civil procedure deals with the jurisdiction of civil courts in India. It declares that
the court shall have jurisdiction to try all lawsuits of civil nature accepting suits of which their cognizance
is either expressly or impliedly barred.

Conditions

A Civil court has jurisdiction to decide a suit if two requirements are fulfilled:
  The suit must be of a civil nature.
 The cognizance of such a suit should not have been expressly or impliedly barred.law to
pronounce the Judgement and put it into execution.

Kinds of jurisdiction

1. Territorial or local jurisdiction

Under this territorial or local jurisdiction, the geographical limits of a court’s authority are clearly
delineated and specified. It cannot exercise authority beyond that geographical/ territorial limit. For
example, if a certain crime is committed in Madhya Pradesh, only the courts of law within the borders of
Madhya Pradesh can hear and decide the case. Furthermore, Section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure
explains the territorial jurisdiction on the grounds of the location of the immovable property. In the case
of Harshad Chiman Lal Modi Vs D.L.F Universal Ltd , the court interpreted Section 16 that the suit
pertaining to immovable property should be brought to the court. The court does not have the power to
decide the rights of property which are not situated. However, the court can still pass a relief if the
opposite party agrees to try the suit in such a case.

2. Pecuniary jurisdiction

Pecuniary means ‘related to capital.’ It approaches the question of whether the court is competent to
try the case of the financial value. The code allows analysing the case unless the suit’s value exceeds the
financial limit of the court. Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure commands the organisation of the
suit in the court of the low grade. It refers to pecuniary jurisdiction of Civil court. It is a course of the
method and it does not affect the jurisdiction of the court. The main objective of establishing pecuniary
jurisdiction is to prevent the court of a higher level from getting burdened and to provide assistance to
the parties. However, the court shall interfere if it finds the judgment to be wrong. For example, ’A
’wants to accuse ‘B’ due to a violation of the contract to obtain Rs 5000 in Bombay. The Bombay High
Court has original jurisdiction and small causes court with the jurisdiction up to Rs 50000. So, a suit to
obtain Rs 5000 should ideally be dealt with small causes court. In the case of Karan Singh Vs Chaman
Paswan the plaintiff filed a suit in the subordinate court involving an amount of Rs 2950, but the court
rejected the case. Later his next appeal was allowed by the High Court, but it ordered him to pay the
deficit amount. The appellant contested that the decision of the district court will be a nullity, but the
High Court dismissed the claim. Later the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the High Court
declaring that the decision of district court won’t be void.

3. Jurisdiction as to the subject matter

The subject matter can be defined as the authority vested in a court to understand and try cases
concerning a special type of subject matter. In other words, it means that some courts are banned from
hearing cases of a certain nature. No question of choices can be decided by the court which do not have
subject matter jurisdiction. Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure is related to the stage challenging
the jurisdiction. For Example, “Ranveer”, a resident of Sonipat bought a food item of ‘AA’ brand that was
plagued with pests. He should prosecute ‘ZZ’ company in Sonipat District forum rather than District Civil
Court of Sonipat.

4. Original and appellate jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction refers to the court’s authority to review or rehearsal the cases that have been
already decided in the lower courts. In the Indian circumstances, both the High Court and Supreme
Court have the appellate jurisdiction to take the subjects that are bought in the form of appeals.

Original Jurisdiction refers to the court’s authority to take notice of cases that could be decided in these
courts in the first instance itself. Unlike appellate jurisdiction wherein courts review the previously
decided matter, here the cases are heard afresh.

5. Exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction

In Civil Procedure, exclusive jurisdiction means where a single court has the authority to decide a case to
the rejection of all the courts. This jurisdiction is decided on the basis of the subject matter dealt with by
a specific court. For example, the U.S District courts have particular jurisdiction on insolvency topics.

Concurrent jurisdiction exists where two or more courts from different systems simultaneously have
jurisdiction over a particular case. In this situation, parties will try to have their civil or criminal case
heard in the court that they perceive will be most favourable to them.

6. General and special jurisdiction

General jurisdiction means that general courts do not limit themselves to hearing only one type of cases.
This type of jurisdiction means that a court has the power to hear all types of cases. So the court that
has general jurisdiction can hear criminal, civil, family court case and much more.

Specific jurisdiction is the ability of the court to hear a lawsuit in a state other than the defendant’s
home state if that defendant has minimum contacts within the state where the suit will be tried.

7. Legal and equitable jurisdiction

Equitable jurisdiction belongs to the authorities of the courts to take specific actions and pass some
orders in order to deliver an equitable and reasonable outcome. These judgments are usually outside
the purview of law, in the sense that support provided by the courts may not be necessarily confirmed
by the statue. In the case of K.K.Velusamy Vs N.Palanisamy, the Supreme Court of India held that Section
151 does not give any special jurisdiction to civil courts, but only presents for the application of
discretionary power to achieve the ends of justice. This suggests that the court cannot give any such
order which may be denied under any law in such an order that may be prohibited under any law in
order to achieve the ends of justice. This would lead to the conclusion that such equitable jurisdiction is
secondary to the authority of the courts to implement the law.
 8. Expounding and expanding jurisdiction

Expounding jurisdiction means to describe, clarify and explain jurisdiction. Expanding jurisdiction means
to develop, expand or prolong jurisdiction. It is the duty of the court to clarify its jurisdiction and it is not
proper for the court to extend its jurisdiction.

Conclusion

Civil court has jurisdiction to investigate whether tribunal and quasi-judicial bodies or legal executive
acted within their jurisdiction. It can be presumed that section 9 essentially deals with the issue of the
civil court’s jurisdiction to consider a matter. Civil court has jurisdiction to consider a suit of civil nature
except when it’s notification is expressly barred or bared by significant suggestion. Civil court has
jurisdiction to resolve the problem of its jurisdiction.

Or

Discuss the essentials of a civil suit. 12

Ans: Introduction

Have you ever wondered how a civil suit is filed in a civil court? Let’s make our basics clear first. The
administration of civil proceedings in India is governed under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
Before filing a civil complaint, it is essential to determine the court’s jurisdiction under Section 9 and the
place of suing under Section 18 of the CPC. The initial step of the procedure of a civil suit is the
institution of the suit under Section 26 of the CPC. The present article provides a detailed study of the
provisions of the institution of the suit under Section 26 of the CPC.

Suit (Meaning and Concept)

The term ‘suit’ is not defined under the CPC, 1908. The Black Law’s Dictionary, 4th edition defines suit as
“A generic term, of comprehensive signification, and applies to any proceeding by one person or
persons against another or others in a court of justice in which the plaintiff pursues, in such court, the
remedy which the law affords him for the redress of an injury or the enforcement of a right, whether at
law or in equity.” A suit is a civil process initiated by the filing of a plaint seeking to enforce civil or
substantive rights against the state or a person. A suit results in a decree. There can be no decree
without a suit.

In the case of Ethiopian Airlines v. Ganesh Narain Saboo (2011), the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed
that the term ‘suit’ is a general term that encompasses all actions to be taken by a person to enforce a
legal right that has been vested in them by law.

In the landmark case of Hansraj Gupta & Others v. Dehra Dun-Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd.
(1932), the Privy Council held that a civil proceeding is instituted by the presentation of a plaint.
Suit under the Limitation Act, 1963

The Limitation Act, 1963 governs the laws regulating the limitation of suits and other procedures. An
appeal or an application is not considered a suit under Section 2(l) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Section 5
of the Limitation Act, 1963, deals with the extension of the prescribed time frame in certain
circumstances. It states that any appeal or application may be allowed even after the limitation period
has passed if the appellant establishes to the court that they could not file the appeal or application
during the limitation period. If the court is satisfied, the delay in submitting the appeal or application
can be excused, regardless of whether the party is a state or a private entity. Section 5 of the Limitation
Act, 1963, does not apply to suits.

Essentials of a Civil suit

The various essentials of a Civil suit under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 can be summarized as
follows:

1. Parties to the suit

There must be at least two opposing parties: the plaintiff who files the suit for claiming relief and the
defendant against whom the plaintiff files for the claim. There is no restriction on the number on either
side. Every suit is instituted by the presentation of a plaint. A plaint must be filed by the plaintiff, a
representative, a recognized agent, or an advocate for the plaintiff.

Order I, Rule 1 of the CPC, outlines the joinder of the plaintiffs to the suit. All persons may join as
plaintiffs if any claim to relief in a single suit arises from the same act or transaction or a series of acts or
transactions alleged to exist jointly, severally, or in the alternative, or where any common question of
law or fact arises.

Order I, Rule 3 of the CPC outlines the joinder of the defendants to the suits. When any claim to relief is
alleged to exist against defendants arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or
transactions, or when any common question of law or fact would emerge if separate cases were
launched against the defendants, all people may join as defendants in a suit.

A misjoinder occurs when a party to the lawsuit is unintentionally added. It is deemed a misjoinder
when a party is added but has nothing to do with the dispute. When a party to the suit is not added to
the suit, then it is a non-joinder. Order I, Rule 9 of the CPC states that no suit shall be dismissed on the
grounds of the misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. This Rule does not apply to necessary parties
interpreted as non-joinder.

2. Cause of action

A cause of action is the set of reasons on the basis of which a lawsuit is instituted in court. It is a set of
facts or allegations that constitutes grounds for filing a lawsuit. It includes all the facts pertaining to
rights and their infringement. Order II, Rule 2 of the CPC states that a cause of action is essential, and a
plaint must mention the cause of action if it is to be instituted as a suit.
In the case of Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association v. Union of India & Ors. (2000), the Hon’ble
Supreme Court held that the phrase “cause of action” had a judicially established meaning. It refers to
the conditions surrounding the violation of the right or the direct cause of the conduct. In a broader
sense, it refers to the conditions required for the suit to be maintained, which include not just the
violation of the right, but the violation combined with the right itself. and summarised the phrase to all
facts that the plaintiff would have to establish if he were to be traversed to maintain his claim to the
Court’s judgement. The cause of action includes every truth that must be proven, as opposed to every
piece of evidence that must be given to substantiate each fact.

3. Subject matter

The set of facts or details about a movable or immovable property that gives rise to a civil dispute to
claim remedies is referred to as the subject matter.

4. The relief claimed by the plaintiff

Relief is a legal remedy available to the plaintiff for a violation of legal rights by the defendant. No
remedy will be granted by a court unless the parties to the complaint request it. There are two types of
relief: specific and alternative. Specific relief is governed under the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

Conclusion

Every right has a remedy, or “Ubi jus, ibi remedium,” which is one of the fundamental principles of the
legal system. A plaintiff may file a civil lawsuit to obtain compensation for losses the defendant has
caused. A plaint must include all relevant information and serves as the first step in the documentary
process of the institution of civil litigation. However, the onus of proof is on the plaintiff as the plaintiff
files the suit and states the facts and legal grounds. The plaintiff must convince the court and support
every allegation made against the defendant by presenting the true facts and reasonable grounds for
the institution of the suit.

4. Define the term "issue". How are the issues framed? What are the consequences of failure to frame
issues? Cite case-law. 2+6+4=12

Ans: Introduction

The term "issue" in a civil case means a disputed question relating to rival contentions in a suit. It is the
focal point of disagreement, argument or decision. It is the point on which a case itself is decided in
favour of one side or the other, by the court. Framing of issues is probably the most important part of
the trail of a civil suit. For a correct and accurate decision in the shortest possible time in a case, it is
necessary to frame the correct and accurate issues. Inaccurate and incorrect issues may kill the valuable
time of the court.

In Siddhi Chunilal vs. Suresh Gopkishan, it was observed that if correct and accurate issues were not
framed, it leads to gross injustice, delay and waste of the court's valuable time in deciding the matter. If
defendant makes no defense, framing and recording issue by the Court does not arise, in such a case, a
Court need not frame and record issue in as much as the defendant makes no defense at the first
hearing of the suit.

For example, a plaintiff says the defendant borrowed Rs 10 lakh from him. The defendant denies it. It is
an affirmation by one party and denial by the other. Then there arises a distinct dispute and that dispute
is termed an "issue". The court can then frame issues based on the facts of the case and proceed with it.

Definition of issues

According to the dictionary meaning, "issue" means a point in question; an important subject of debate,
disagreement, discussion, argument or litigation. Issues mean a single material point of fact or law in
litigation that is affirmed by one party and denied by the other party to the suit and that subject of the
final determination of the proceedings.

In Howell v. Dering, the court held that, an issue is that which, if decided in favour of plantiff, will in it
give a right to relief; and if decided in favour of the defendant, will in itself be a defence.

Issues arise when a material proposition of fact or law is affirmed by one party and denied by the other
party to the suit.

Material Propositions

According to Rule 1 (2), material propositions are those propositions of fact or law which a plaintiff must
allege in order to show a right to sue or a defendant must allege in order to constitute his defense. Each
material proposition affirmed by one party and denied by the other shall form the subject - matter of a
distinct issue.

Kinds of issues

As per the Order 14 Rule 1(4) of the C.P.C. issues are of two kinds:

 Issues of fact
 Issues of Law.
 Issues, however, may be mixed issues of fact and law.

Rule 2(1) OF Order 14 provides that where issues both of law and fact arise in the same suit,
notwithstanding that a case may be disposed of on a preliminary issue, the court should pronounce
judgment on all issues. But if the court is of the opinion that the case or any part thereof may be
disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first, if that issue relates to:

 The jurisdiction of the court; or

 A bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force,

For that purpose, the court may, if it thinks fit, postpone the settlement of the other issues until the
issues of law have been decided.
Object of framing of issues

The main object of framing issues is to ascertain the real dispute between the parties by narrowing
down the area of conflict and determine where the parties differ.

An obligation is cast on the court to read the plaint and the written statement and then determine with
the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, material propositions of fact or of law on which the
parties are variance. The issue shall be formed on which the decision of the case shall depend.

The evidence shall be confined to the issues. The object of an issue is to tie down the evidence and
arguments and decision to a particular question so that there may be no doubt on what the dispute is.
The judgment then proceeding issue-wise would be able to tell precisely how the dispute was decided.

In MB Sanghvi v Secretary, Madras Chillies Merchant, Supreme Court held that, the Court should not
determine an issue which does not arise on the pleadings and should not decide a suit on a matter on
which no issue has been raised. No issue need be framed on a point of law which is perfectly clear.

In Akha Ram v LR of Ram Sahai, the court held that where broader issue framed having mixed facts,
some facts relating to plaintiff and some facts relating to defendant, the trial Court allowing plaintiff to
lead evidence of defendant was not improper.

Materials are required for framing of issues

The issues may be framed by the Court from all or any of the following materials:

 Allegations made on oath by the parties, or by any persons present on their behalf, or made by
the pleaders of such parties;
 Allegations made in the pleadings or in answers to interrogatories delivered in the suit;
 The contents of the documents produced by either party.

Amendment of issues framed

Order 14 Rule 5, C.P.C. empowers the court to amend issues framed or frame additional issues at any
stage of proceedings. Issues can be amended at any stage of the trail. They can also be amended by
appellate or revisional court.

In Nagubai Ammal v. B. Shama Rao, Supreme Court observed that, a trail does not get vitiated on wrong,
improper or defective issues.

Omission to frame issues

Even though it is the duty of the court to frame proper issues, mere omission to frame an issue is not
necessarily fatal to the suit. Omission to frame an issue is an irregularity which may be or may not be a
material one. If such an omission affects the disposal of the suit on merits, the case must be remanded
to the trial court for a fresh trial.

Where the parties went to trail with full knowledge that a particular point was at issue, they have not
been prejudiced and substantial justice has been done, absence of an issue is not fatal to the case so as
to vitiate the proceedings.

Conclusion

Issues are very important not only for the parties but also for the Court. Thus framing of issues is a very
important stage of a civil trial. Parties are required to prove or disprove the issues framed by the court,
not the pleading. On the other side, court is also bound to give decision on each framed issue.
Therefore, the Court is not to decide those matters on which no issues have been framed.

If issues are properly framed, the controversy in the case can be clearly focused and documents can be
properly appreciated in that light. The relevant evidence can also be carefully examined. Careful framing
of issues also helps in proper examination and cross examination of witnesses and final arguments in the
case.

Or

What is an appeal? What are the different kinds of appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure? Explain
the powers and duties of the appellate court. 2+2+8=12

Ans: Introduction

An appeal is a remedial concept determined as an individual’s right to seek justice against an unjust
decree/order via referring it to a Superior Court. Sections 96 to 99A; 107 to 108 & Order 41 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 deal with appeals from original decrees known as First appeals.

Meaning of Appeal in CPC

The concept of ‘appeal’ is not explicitly defined in the CPC (Code of Civil Procedure). According to the
Black’s Law Dictionary, ‘appeal’ is the formal complaint made to a higher court to rectify an injustice or
error committed by a lower court.

The Superior Court, to which the appeal is made, reviews and retrials the case, effectively transferring it
from a court of lower jurisdiction to one with greater authority.

Forms of appeal

Appeals may be broadly classified into two kinds:

 First appeal; and

 Second appeal.

The sub-categories under appeals are:

  Appeal from original decree;
 Appeal from order;
 Appeal from appellate decree/second appeal/to High Court;
 Appeal to the Supreme Court.

Powers of Appellate Court under CPC

The appellate Court is granted several powers under Section 107 and the corresponding rules of Order
41 of the Code of Civil Procedure:

1. Power to decide a case finally (Section 107(l)(a) and Rule 24)

When the evidence on record is sufficient, the appellate Court can make a final decision on the case,
even if the judgment of the lower Court was based on different grounds.

2. Power of remand (Section 107(1)(b) and Rule 23)

If the trial court decides the case on a preliminary point without considering other issues, and the
appellate Court reverses that decree, it can remand the case back to the trial court to decide the
remaining issues and reach a decision.

3. Power to frame issues and refer them for trial (Section 107(1)(c), Rules 25 and 26)

If the trial court fails to frame an issue or overlooks a crucial factual question, the appellate Court can
frame those issues and refer them for trial to the lower Court. The lower Court is directed to take the
additional evidence required to properly determine the case.

4. Power to take additional evidence (Section 107(1)(d), Rules 27-29)

Generally, the appellate Court decides the appeal in CPC based on the evidence presented during the
original trial. However, the Court may admit additional evidence if the party requesting it demonstrates
that this evidence was not available during the initial trial despite their best efforts. The other party
must have an opportunity to challenge the additional evidence, which should be relevant to the issues
under consideration.

5. Power to modify the decree (Rule 33)

The appellate Court is empowered to grant or refuse relief to the appellant and provide suitable relief to
the respondents as necessary. The Court can make any decision it deems appropriate, not just between
the appellant and the respondent but also between two respondents.

These powers enable the appellate Court to ensure fair and just adjudication of the case based on the
evidence and merits presented before it.

Duties of an appellate court

The appellate Court has a duty to analyze the factual position in the background of principles of law
involved and then decide the appeal.

 To provide cogent reasons for setting aside a judgment of an inferior Court.

 To delve into the question of limitation under Section 3(1) of the Limitation Act.
 To decide the appeal in compliance with the scope & powers conferred on it under Section 96
r/w O.XLI, R.31 of the CPC.

Conclusion

Appeals are recognized as statutory rights of persons aggrieved by any decision of an inferior court in
the interest of justice. First appeals are a form of appeal prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure.
The period of limitation in case of an appeal to the first appellate authority is 90 days where it lies to the
High Court. Finally, it can be concluded that the provisions of the CPC extensively deal with the
substantive as well as procedural aspects relating to all kinds of appeals, while making express
modifications in order to be accommodative of the more specific legislation.

5. What is review? On what grounds is a review allowed? Discuss the procedural aspects of review.

2+4+6=12

Ans:

Introduction

Review means to look once again. Section 114 and Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)
deals with the concept of review. Review is covered under S. 114 of CPC. Review means nothing but to
reconsider/rethink or re examine/re-evaluate something. The term "review" refers to a court's re-
examination of a previous decision. The very same judge and the very same court conduct the review.
Any individual who is dissatisfied by an order or decree from which no appeal exists or wherein an
appeal exists but is not chosen may request a review of verdict.

Any person who has been aggrieved by a court of small causes decision on a referral may request a
review of the judgement. The petition for review must be fled with the court that issued the decree or
order. The court to which a petition for review should be addressed is the court that issued the
judgement or order. An application for review can be filed by anyone who is affected by a decree /order
or by the ruling of court of small causes on a reference. The provisions governing the form of preferred
appeals apply to the application form for review also with few necessary alterations which is also known
as "mutatis mutandis".

Section 114, CPC

This section states that subject as aforesaid, any person considering himself aggrieved—

(a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this Code, but from which no appeal has
been preferred.
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed by this Code, or

(c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, may apply for a review of judgment to the
Court which passed the decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order thereon as it
thinks fit.

Review (Meaning)

“Review”, in a very general understanding of a layman, as described by the oxford dictionary, states – “A
formal assessment of something with the intention to institute a change if necessary”. The concept
under the law actually goes in consonance with the stated description, having in addition the conditions
for applicability, specific grounds along with other general rules.

Object of Review

The main object of granting a review of judgment is reconsideration of the same matter by the same
court and the same judge under certain conditions.

The power of review is inherited in every court to prevent miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and
palpable errors committed by it.

Grounds For Review

Review can be filed, if there is:

1. “Discovery of New and Important matter or evidence, which, after the exercise of due
diligence was not within the knowledge of the person seeking review or could not be
produced by him at any time when the decree was passed or order made”,

Discovery of any new matter or evidence necessarily has to be an important or relevant as such to the
extent that had it been brought on record at any time when the decree was passed or order made, it
would have an impact and might have altered the decision. Moreover, absence of such important
matter or evidence on record at the time of decision, must not be the result of negligent attitude of the
concerned person and therefore such person applying for Review is required by law to strictly prove that
such matter or evidence was not within his knowledge or could not be adduced, even after exercising
due diligence and unless such proof is given, application shall not be granted.

Court may take subsequent events into consideration while reviewing a decision, however the fact that
the question of law on which decision, sought be reviewed, is based has been reversed or modified
subsequently by the higher authority in any other case, would not make it a new and important matter,
to review the decision.

Illustration – “A sued B for a sum of money alleged to be due under an agreement and obtained the
decree for the same, against which B, subsequently filed an appeal in the Privy Council, and while the
appeal was pending, A obtained another decree against B on the strength of the former decree, for
another sum of money alleged by him to have become due under the same agreement and later Privy
Council reversed the former decree in the appeal, on the basis of which B applied to the court which had
passed the second decree, for the Review on the ground of the decision of Privy Council and so was
accepted and held by the court to be a new and important matter”[xvi].

2. “some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record”,

The mistake or error should be such, which is very obvious and visible itself on the face of it, and
therefore any error found out from the judgment after a long reasoning and law based analysis, cannot
be said to be one apparent on the face of record, as a ground for review. However, such mistake or error
can be of fact and as well as of law.

Illustrations – “Non-consideration of the very obvious application of particular law, such as law of
limitation or particular provision to the facts of the case, setting aside of the ex parte decree without
being satisfied of the any of the conditions laid down in Order 9 Rule 13, application of religious law
which has not been legally recognized, wrong interpretation of a settled legal issue, where a commission
was issued to examine a witness in a country where no reciprocal arrangement exists, have been held to
be an error apparent on the face of record”.

3. “any other sufficient reason”.

Before 1922, the application of the term “Sufficient reason” was unrestricted and unregulated, finally in
that year a principle came to be laid down by the Privy Council in the case of Chhajju Ram V. Neki[xviii],
which can be summarized as that “the third ground mentioned, is no doubt giving wide scope to the
grounds for review, but at the same time that “sufficient reason” has to be at least analogous (ejusdem
generis) to either of the other two grounds and the mere reason that decree was passed or order made
on erroneous ground that court failed to appreciate the important matter or evidence, would not make
any good ground for review, and therefore in such cases, the appeal and not review, is the remedy to
get such erroneous decree or order corrected”.

Illustrations – Failure to adhere to legal provision which required the court to act in a particular manner
would fall within the meaning of “Sufficient Reason” as analogous to the “Error Apparent on the Face of
the Record”. Order of the dismissal of a suit due to default of the plaintiff, cannot be reviewed on the
ground of misapprehension of the counsel as sufficient reason, but if order was on its face illegal then
such order may be reviewed on the ground as error of the law apparent on the face of the record.

Order XLVII in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)

Order XLVII in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) together with Section 114 of the Act, provides the
procedure for Review. Section 114 merely produces the conditions necessary for the filing the
application for Review to the ‘court’ by which decree or order, sought to be reviewed under the
application, was passed or made. While Order XLVII along with the same conditions as enumerated in
the section, lays down grounds for Review and other procedural rules governing the same.

In order to understand the legal procedure, Two Primary Aspects of the concept need to be borne in the
mind, which are as follows –
 1. “Same Court” – Rule 1 of the Order specifically provide that application for Review of the decree
or order has to be made to the very same court which passed such decree or made such order.
2. “Court” – The term has not been defined in the CPC, but impliedly interpreted as “Any Court
having the jurisdiction to try the suits of a civil nature”[i], now such civil jurisdiction may be such
as conferred upon the courts by the CPC itself, or upon the Tribunals by the special statues, or
upon the Supreme Court and High Courts under their civil appellate jurisdiction[ii], by the
Constitution of India.

Review Jurisdiction for the Supreme Court – The Apex Court, therefore also falls within the meaning of
the term “Court” while hearing any suit of a civil nature. It however has been separately empowered
with the review jurisdiction under Article 137 of the Constitution, but for the cases other than that of
civil and criminal, since for such cases, it is being governed by the CPC and Criminal Procedure Code
only.

Review Jurisdiction for the High Courts – Apart from the power conferred upon it as a “Civil Court”
under the CPC, it has been held by the Apex Court in the case of Shivdeo Singh v. State of Punjab :

“It is sufficient to say that there is nothing in Article 226 of the Constitution to preclude a High Court
from exercising the power of review which inheres in every Court of plenary jurisdiction to prevent
miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and palpable errors committed by it.”

Conclusion

The power of reviewing of its own judgment is conferred on the court. Section 114 and Order 47 of Civil
procedure Code provides the right to review the judgment. Section 114 provides only right to review the
judgment and order 47 of CPC provides limitations and conditions. Article 137 of the Indian Constitution
allowed the Supreme Court to review its own orders and judgment. The objective behind this power is
to ensure justice. It is rightly said that Law has to bend before justice.

Or

Distinguish between: 4×3=12

(a) Appeal and Second Appeal

Ans:

SL No. Appeal Second Appeal

1. Sections 96 to 99-A, 107 and Order 41 deal Section 100 to 103 and Order 42 deal with
with First appeal, Second Appeal,

2. A first appeal lies against a decree passed by a A second appeal lies against a decree passed
 court exercising original jurisdiction, by a first appellate court,

3. The first appeal can be admitted on the The second appeal can only be admitted only
grounds of question of fact, and question of on the point of ‘substantial question of law’.
law, or on a mixed question of fact and law,

4. The first appeal can be entertained by a The second appeal can only be entertained
subordinate Court which may or may not be a by the High Court,
High Court,

5. The Memorandum of first appeal must set out It needs not set out the grounds of objections
the grounds of objections to the decree to the decree appealed from.
appealed from.

(b) Review and Revision

Ans: Key Difference Between Review and Revision

Basis Review Revision

1. Meaning and Scope The term “review” denotes the act of In contrast, “revision” entails a
reconsideration, looking again, or re- more overarching concept where
examining a legal case. Specifically, it the High Court takes on the
involves a judicial re-evaluation responsibility of revisiting and
conducted by the same court and the potentially modifying judgments
same judge that initially rendered the issued by subordinate courts.
judgment. This process is primarily aimed The scope of revision is broader,
at rectifying errors or addressing extending beyond the confines
overlooked aspects of the case. of the same court or judge, with
the High Court acting as the
revising authority.

2. Objective The primary objective of a review is to The overarching goal of revision

correct any errors made in an order that is to address instances of
could impact the interests of a party illegality, irregularity, or
involved. It is a mechanism for the same impropriety within the
court and judge to revisit their own proceedings of subordinate
decision, ensuring fairness and accuracy courts. The High Court, in its
in the legal process. revisional capacity, aims to
examine records related to “any
 order” and correct any flaws or
injustices observed.

3. Provisions in CPC The legal foundation for the process of Section 115 of the CPC is the
review is laid out in Section 114 of the statutory source for the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This revisional jurisdiction of the High
section explicitly defines the parameters Court. It delineates the High
and circumstances under which a review Court’s authority to revise
can be initiated. judgments made by subordinate
courts under specific
circumstances.

4. Initiation and Typically, a review is initiated by a party Unlike review, revision can be
Authority directly involved in the case, and the initiated by the High Court itself
same court and judge handle the process. (suo motu) or by an aggrieved
The authority for review lies within the party. The High Court serves as
confines of the court that issued the the revising authority, providing
original judgment. a higher judicial forum for the
reevaluation of cases.

5. Time Frame for There is no specified limitation period Section 115 establishes a
Application mentioned for filing a review application limitation period of 90 days for
in Section 114 of the CPC. However, it is filing a revision application from
generally expected that the application is the date of the judgment or
made within a reasonable time from the decree in question.
pronouncement of the judgment.

6. Nature of Errors The grounds for review include the The High Court exercises
Addressed discovery of new and important matter or revisional jurisdiction mainly on
evidence, apparent mistakes or errors on matters of jurisdiction. It
the face of the record, and other intervenes when there are
sufficient reasons. Review primarily instances of illegality,
focuses on correcting errors within the irregularity, or impropriety in the
original court’s judgment. proceedings of subordinate
courts.
7. Court Involvement The review process is an internal affair of In the case of revision, the
the same court that rendered the involvement of the High Court
judgment. The same judge who passed introduces an external and
the original decree is involved in the re- superior judicial authority into
examination the process. The High Court,
being the revising body, brings a
fresh perspective to the case.

(c) Set-off and Counter-claim.

Ans: : It is crucial to understand and carefully consider the difference between set-off and counter-
claim under CPC, as they may appear similar but have significant differences:

1. Nature

Set-off is a statutory defence available to the defendant in response to the plaintiff’s action, while a
counter-claim is essentially a cross-action initiated by the defendant.

2. Basis

Set-off must be based on an ascertained sum or arise from the same transaction as the plaintiff’s claim.
On the other hand, a counter-claim does not necessarily have to arise from the same transaction.

3. Purpose

Set-off serves as a statutory defence and is pleaded in the written statement. It acts as a shield for the
defendant and cannot be used as an offensive measure. In contrast, a counter-claim does not provide a
defence against the plaintiff’s claim. Instead, it empowers the defendant to assert their claim against the
plaintiff, similar to an independent action. It serves as a weapon of offence.

4. Scope

An equitable set-off typically cannot exceed the plaintiff’s claim and is a defensive measure. In contrast,
a counter-claim can exceed the plaintiff’s claim as it operates as a cross-action.

According to Rule 6-F of Order 6, if a set-off or counter-claim is established as a defence against the
plaintiff’s claim and a balance is found due to the defendant, the court may grant judgment to the party
entitled to such balance.

However, it is important to note that in both set-off and counter-claim cases, the defendant’s claims
must not exceed the pecuniary limits of the court’s jurisdiction.
6. Write explanatory notes on (any two) 6x2=12

(a) Service of summons

Ans: Summons under the CPC are governed under Sections 27 and 28 and Order V of the Code. In tune
with the purpose of the service of summons – which is to provide information to the defendant of the
institution of the suit, and for appearance before the court – a typical summons will contain the
following:

Purpose for service of summons

Date on which the defendant is to appear before the court (containing the next date of hearing in the
suit);

 A copy of the plaint filed by the plaintiff (as mandated by Order V Rule 2 of the CPC);
 The signature of the judge or his appointed officer, and the seal of the court;
 Any other appropriate directions which are deemed necessary by the court.

Section 27 of the CPC provides for an outer limit of thirty days within which summons must be
dispatched to the defendant. Order V Rule 1 gives the defendant thirty days from receiving the
summons to appear before court and file a written statement under Order VIII Rule 1.

The second proviso to Rule 1 – which applies specifically to commercial suits under the Commercial
Courts Act, 2015 - establishes a mandatory outer limit of 120 days from the date of service of summons
upon the defendant to file their written statement, failing which no written statement shall be taken on
record by the court. The mandatory timeline under the Commercial Courts Act was introduced in order
to ensure that the underlying goal of ensuring efficient and time-bound adjudication of commercial
disputes.

Upon receiving the summons, sub-rule (2) of Order V Rule 1 states that the defendant can appear either
in person or through a pleader in order to answer the claims made against them, unless the defendant’s
presence in person has been mandated by the court specifically under Order V Rule 3(1) of the Code.
However, the requirement of personal presence of either party is qualified by Order V Rule 4, which
states that such presence will not be ordered by the court unless the said party resides within the
court’s ordinary original jurisdiction, or less than two hundred miles from the court.

The appearance of either party is not always sought by the court at the preliminary stage. Order V Rule
5, for instance, empowers the court to ascertain whether the summons shall be for the settlement of
issues or final disposal, and accordingly determine the directions to be provided in the summons. The
proviso to Rule 5 mandates the courts for small causes to issue summons only for final disposal of the
suit. Rules 7 and 8 of Order V further contain situations where the defendant is directed, in the
summons served, to produce documents which he seeks to rely upon to support its case, or (in cases of
final disposal) to produce its witness on the day stipulated for its appearance before the court.
In evaluating whether summons has been effectively served upon the defendant, and in situations
where the court will deem summons to have been effectively served for the suit to proceed, Order V
Rule 9 of the CPC provides exhaustive stipulations for such service to be carried out by the court. While
Rule 9 provides for service through a court officer (who is referred to as the bailiff), it also provides for
service through postal or courier services – including through registered post acknowledgement due,
speed post or courier as approved by the High Court/district court or through fax/email etc. The proviso
to Rule 9 states that such service of summons is to be made by the court at the expense of the plaintiff.
This practice usually is facilitated by the court’s office, where the appropriate fee can be paid by the
plaintiff or their pleader.

Where such summons has been served by the court under Rule 5, but are returned on account of the
defendant refusing to accept the same, the court is empowered to declare that summons has been duly
served upon the defendant. The reason behind such a provision is to ensure that the plaintiff’s case –
which might be based upon legitimate and bona fide claims – is not derailed because of the defendant’s
explicit refusal to appear before court and defend their position.

Rule 9A of Order V allows the plaintiff to serve the summons personally upon the defendant, after filing
an application to such effect which is to be allowed by the court. The prerogative is then placed on the
plaintiff to ensure that the defendant acknowledges the service of summons, and such
acknowledgement is captured in the return of the summons to the court. Rule 9A is one of the
safeguards available under the CPC against defendants who refuse to acknowledge receipt of summons
which is effectively abuses the process of law.

The Supreme Court in its seminal judgement of Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India (2005)
cautioned against such abuse of process of law, and advised High Courts to issue appropriate rules or
practice directions – such as filing of affidavits evidencing the service of summons by the plaintiff – to
prevent mala fide attempts by defendants to avoid service.

(b) Suits by or against corporation

Ans: The legal provisions under Order 30 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 are as follows;

 Suing of partners in name of the firm

Rule 1 provides the basic idea of nature which the provisions of Order 30 seek to establish. It states that
two or more persons who are liable to be partners can sue or can be sued in the name of the firm in
which they were a part when the cause of action occurred. This helps in facilitating the litigation process
where the individuals or the partners can seek relief by making the litigation entirely about the
partnership firm rather than a single individual.

It further provides for the application to the court, if needed, for the list of partners of that firm to verify
the concerned partners during the time when the cause of action arose.
In Shankar Housing Corp. v. Mohan, the Delhi High Court explained that Rule 1 is required to sue the
firm to prevent the difficulty of finding the guilty partner. Instead of suing him/her separately, the
aggrieved party can file a suit against the firm in which the partners can be held equally and jointly
liable.

 Disclosure of Partners’ name

Rule 2 of Order 30 provides that, when the partners sue in the name of the firm, the defendant may in
writing demand for the disclosure of the names of the partners of the firm with their places of
residence. The rule states that the suit shall proceed in the name of the firm but the decree passed by
the court shall constitute the names of all the partners. This rule further provides that if the firm or the
partners fails to comply with the demand made by the other party the proceedings may be stayed by
the direction of the court.

In the case of Alwar Iron v. Union of India, it was observed that if a firm files for a suit and discloses the
names of certain persons as partners who are not registered as partners of the firm, it will be considered
fraud to the court and the suit shall be dismissed with no cost to the plaintiffs.

 Service

Rule 3 of the Order deals with the way of service of summons on the partners of the firm, and provides
that the service shall be made either;

 upon any one or more of the partners, or

 at the principal place where the partnership firm is conducted upon the person who at that time
is in charge of the management of such place as directed by the court irrespective of the fact
whether or not at that time any of the partners are in India.

However, if the Partnership of the firm has been dissolved and the plaintiff was aware of it, service of
summons shall be made on the persons who are available in India at that time and who are sought to be
made liable.

In the case of R.D.Khan v. Bombay Iron Syndicate, the court held that if the summon is served to the
partners or the firm manager and the partners are out of India during the time of receipt, it is the duty
of the third party(who receives the summon) to inform the partners of the firm about the summon. The
receipt of summon by him shall be deemed to be complete service.

 Rights of suit on death of partner

Rule 4 provides for the consequences upon the death of a partner. It states that before the institution of
the suit or during the pendency of the suit if the partner dies it shall not be necessary to include the
legal representative in the suit. However, this shall not limit or affect any rights of the legal
representatives of the deceased which may have;

 application to be made a party to the suit,

  enforcement of any claim against the survivor or the survivors.

In the case of Upper India Cable Co. v. Bal Kishan, the question which arose in front of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court was whether an appeal abates in the absence of heirs or legal representatives of the
deceased partners of the firm. The court stated that the death has no impact on the proceedings and
the appeal cannot be abated. Thus, the question of substituting heirs and legal representatives should
not arise.

 Notice in what capacity served

Rule 5 of Order 30 puts an obligation on the part of the plaintiff to serve a notice in writing to the firm at
the time of the service of summons. The main objective for serving such notice is to inform the partners
of the firm in what capacity they have been sued.

In the case of Srinath Brothers v. Century Mills, the court observed that if a person is sued in the
capacity of a partner or he is sued in the capacity of a manager, notice under Rule 5 must be issued in
both cases.

 Appearance of partners

According to Rule 6 of Order 30 when the partners are sued in the name of the firm, each partner shall
appear in the court in their own name. However, all the subsequent proceedings shall be continued in
the name of the firm.

 No appearance except by partners

Rule 7 of the Order states that the persons who are sued in the capacity of a partner need to be present
during the proceedings of the court. This means that if a person is sued in the capacity of a manager, he
doesn’t need to appear before the court, but if he is sued in the capacity of a partner, he shall appear
before the court.

 Appearance under protest

Rule 8 of the Order states that the person who has been served with summons as a partner under Rule 3
may contest before the court by stating that he was not a partner at the material time by entering an
appearance under protest.

The plaintiff or the person entering the appearance may apply to the court to determine whether or not
he was a partner to the firm and shall be liable as such. However, this shall be done at any time before
the date fixed for hearing and final disposal of the suit.

In case the court holds that the person was a partner at the material time, he can file a defense for
denying the liability imposed on the firm in respect of the claim against the defendant. On the other
hand, if the court holds that the person was not a partner at the material time and was not liable as
such, the plaintiff is prevented from alleging the liability of the person as a partner in the execution of
any decree that may be passed against the firm. However, the plaintiff is not prevented from serving a
summon on the firm and proceeding with the suit.

 Suits between co-partners

Rule 9 of Order 30 speaks about suits that are instituted between a firm and one or more partners
therein or between firms that have one or more common partners. In such cases, no execution shall be
issued without the leave of the court to safeguard the interest of all the partners. On an application of
leave to issue such execution the court may direct accounts and inquiries during the time of execution.

 Suit against person carrying on business in name other than his own

Rule 10 of Order 30 explains its applicability in cases where a person is carrying on a business in a name
or style other than his own or a Hindu Undivided Family which is carrying out a business in any name. In
such cases, they may be sued in a manner as if it were a firm name and will be executed according to the
provisions under this Order.

The Supreme Court in Ashok Transport Agency v. Awadhesh Kumar said that Rule 10 of Order 30 makes
the provisions under this Order applicable to proprietary concerns as well. It enables the proprietor of
the business to be sued in the name of the firm of his proprietary concern.

(c) Summary suits.

Ans: Summary suit or summary procedure is provided under order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908. The summary suit is a unique legal procedure used for enforcing a right in an efficacious manner
as the courts pass judgement without hearing the defence. While this prima facie would appear to be
violative of the cardinal principle of natural justice, Audi Alteram Partem, nobody should be condemned
unheard, this procedure is only used in cases where the defendant has no defence and is applicable to
only limited subject matters.

Therefore, this gives rise to an interesting question which forms the crux of this paper: What amounts to
having no defence? This question is central to the practical application of Or.37 and has been analyzed
in this paper after considering a catena of recent judgments and provisions under this order.

Nature

A summary suit under order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure is a legal procedure used for enforcing a
right that takes effect faster than ordinary suits as unlike in ordinary suits the courts do not hear the
defence. However it does not violate the principles of Audi Alteram Partem, nobody should be
condemned unheard as it is used only in certain limited cases (elaborated below under scope) where the
defendant has no tenable defence, which is a complex question of law and fact and has been elaborately
analyzed subsequently.

Object
The object underlying the summary procedure is to ensure an expeditious hearing and disposal of the
suit and to prevent unreasonable obstruction by the defendant who has no defence or a frivolous and
vexatious defence and to assist expeditious disposal of cases.

The Gujarat High Court in outlining the object of summary suits opined that the sheer purpose of
enacting Summary Suits is to give impetus to commerce and industry by inspiring confidence in
commercial population that their causes in respect of money claims of liquidating amounts (ascertained
amount) would be expeditiously decided and their claims will not hang on for years blocking their
money for a long period.

Scope and extent of applicability

A summary suit can be instituted in High Courts, City Civil Courts, Courts of Small Causes and any other
court notified by the High Court. High Courts can restrict, enlarge or vary the categories of suits to be
brought under this order. As explained above that the object of Summary suits is to aid commercial
transactions by a swift redressal mechanism these suits can be instituted only in case of certain specified
documents.

The documents such as a bill of exchange, hundies, and promissory notes[4] and suits in which the
plaintiff seeks only to recover a debt or liquidated demand in money payable by the defendant, with or
without interest, arising on a written contract; or on an enactment, where the sum sought to be
recovered is a fixed sum of money or in the nature of a debt other than a penalty; or on a guarantee,
where the claim against the principal is in respect of a debt or liquidated demand only[5].

The procedure of Summary Suits

Rules 2 and 3 provide the procedure of summary suits. Under rule 2 after the summons of the suit has
been issued to the defendant. The defendant is not entitled to defend Summary suit unless he enters an
appearance.

In default of this, the plaintiff will be entitled to an ex parte decree which is on a different footing to an
Ex Parte decree passed in ordinary suits (the differences have been analyzed subsequently).

In the case that the defendant appears, the defendant must apply for leave to defend within ten days
from the date of service of summons upon him and such leave will be granted only if the affidavit filed
by the defendant discloses such facts as may be deemed to entitle him to defend.

The cases where leave to defend should and shouldn’t be granted have been analyzed subsequently.

Analyzing summary suits

Types of interpretations to be applied

As the purpose of summary suits is to act as a welfare mechanism to achieve justice in an expedient
manner, the language under Or.37 is to be interpreted liberally, which has been reflected in numerous
judgments.

An illustrative example would be the phrase written contracts that have been given the widest possible
interpretation as even Invoices/Bills are written contract within the contemplation of Order 37 KIG
Systel Ltd v. Fijitsu ICIM Ltd.

Or

Write an essay on the causes of delay in civil litigation. Refer the amendments of the Civil Procedure
Code in 1999 and 2002. Refer case-law. 12

Ans: Introduction

As the famous dictum says Justice delayed is justice denied. It is imperative that a person gets justice
within time. Refusal of timely justice is equal to a denial of justice. In India, the existing justice delivery
system is not proper and takes an unnecessarily long time to deal with a case. It is due to the enormous
backlog of cases. According to the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDC), there are 3.3 crore cases pending
in India of which Uttar Pradesh (61.58 lakhs) accounts for the highest pendency of cases followed by
Maharashtra (33.22 lakhs) and West Bengal (17.59 lakhs). Speedy justice is a fundamental right and has
also been reiterated by the Apex Court in a number of cases. Inordinate delay is unjustified and violates
the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court in
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, Abdul Rahman Antulay v. R S Nayak held that the procedure which
does not provide for speedy trial cannot be regarded as just, fair and reasonable. The main cause of
delay in civil litigation is the complex procedure of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and overabundance of
cases for which the present Judge’s strength is totally deficient. The number of pending cases in India is
growing at an alarming rate every day and the litigants face weak prospects of their cases being
deferred rapidly. The problems of delay in the existing legal system in India have been extensively
examined by the Law Commission of India over the years. The Supreme Court in Imtiyaz Ahmad v. State
of Uttar Pradesh coordinated the Commission to attempt an inquiry and present its suggestions for the
establishment of additional Courts for the expeditious disposal of matters before a Civil Court. The real
issue of delay emerges when the time taken for disposal of a case surpasses the normal time taken to
dispose of the case. This undermines the efficiency of the judiciary in India.

Causes of delay

There are numerous reasons responsible for the resolution of cases in a timely manner. Some of the
important causes are discussed here:

Judge-citizen ratio and vacancies of the Judges: The main reason for the delay is the shortage of judges
with regard to the population of the country. There are many empty vacancies for judges which is
another cause that leads to delay. Recently, the Parliament has passed the Supreme Court (Number of
Judges) Amendment Bill, 2019 to increase the number of Judges from 30 to 33 in the Supreme Court.
Since 1987, the population of the country has considerably increased and the judge-citizen ratio
currently is around 10 million to 1. In 1987, the Law Commission in its report suggested a ratio of 50
million to 1. The sanctioned strength of High Court Judges is 1079 of which 397 seats (around 37%) are
vacant around 25 High Courts in India as of December 2019.

Deficient number of courts: The Law Commission in its 254th report mentions the establishment of
additional courts for speedy disposal of cases. An inadequate number of courts is viewed as a significant
problem. Further, the suggestion for the creation of additional courts to the Law Commission was also
given in the matter of Imtiyaz Ahmad v. State of U.P by the Supreme Court.

Frequent adjournments: Despite the fact that the Civil Procedure Code under Order XVII, Rule 1 provides
that adjournment cannot be granted more than three times, the courts do not seem to follow this rule
in the strict sense. This eventually impedes expedient disposal of civil matter.

Transfer of judges: when the judges are transferred, the new Judge may at times order for new trial
altogether which postpones the procedures. This is another cause which obstructs timely disposal of
matters.

Huge number of appeals: when a large number of appeals are brought before the Courts they find it
difficult to invest their time and energy in the disposal of important matters and as a result have to
invest their time in the disposal of these large numbers appeals.

Non-compliance with the provisions of Section 89: Section 89 provides that if there is a possibility of
settling the dispute outside the court, it will coordinate the issue for ADR instead of continuing with the
ordinary procedure. This section was added by the amendment Act in order to reduce the delay in civil
cases if the matters are likely to be settled outside the court with the consent of the parties by the
methods of arbitration, conciliation, Lok Adalat, mediation. However, judges sometimes fail to refer the
matter for ADR which is another cause that hampers the timely disposal of cases. Nonadherence to
Section 89 causes a delay in civil suits.

Non-appearance of the parties: Another reason which leads to delay in civil cases is when the date and
time are fixed for a matter and the parties do not turn up on the given date and time. Since the
respondent knows the probability of the judgment against him most of the time he tries to take as many
adjournments as possible to give his counter. Further, the delay is also caused because the parties do
not appear for cross-examination. The provision of CPC provides that

Non-adherence to Order X: The Law Commission in its 77th Report mentioned that it is crucial that the
Judge should read the pleadings of the parties in advance and should be aware of the case of each party
and only then the issues could be framed properly to make proper use of Order X. Order X refers to the
examination of parties by the Court and hence, non-adherence to this rule affects the proceedings.

Delay in the filing of written statement: The defendant has to file his written statement within 30 days
from the date of service of summons as provided under Order VIII of CPC. However, this rule is not
adhered to by the Courts properly which is another reason for the delay in civil suits. The fact remains
that this provision of the Code which was designed to speed up the process is misused and not followed
strictly.

Amendments of 1992 and 2002

The Code of Civil Procedure has been considerably changed in the year 2002. Amendment to the Code
was also made earlier in the year 1999 but it was not made viable. Both the amendments were made
effective on 1st July 2002. The principal reason for the Amendment to the Code was to guarantee
expedient disposal of Civil cases represented under the CPC.

The constitutional validity of these amendments was consequently challenged in the case of Salem
Advocate Bar Association of India vs Union of India to which the Court held that the amendments are
valid and if any difficulties still arise then it can be set before the committee and the committee would
consider the difficulties and make suggestions regarding them.

Primary features of the amendments

 Section 26 Institution of suits

A subsection to his Section was added by the1999 Amendment Act which made it compulsory that every
fact referred to in the plaint to be proved by an affidavit. Hence, the plaint now has to be presented
along with an affidavit at the institution of the suit.

 Section 27 Summons to the defendant

Section 27 talks about issuing a summon to the defendant to appear and answer the claim in the suit.
Prior to the amendment in 1999, there was no time period for serving a summons on the defendant.
The amendment prescribed a time-limit of 30 days. The section now provides that summons has to be
issued to the defendant to appear and answer the claim within 30 days from the date of the institution
of the suit.

 Section 89 Settlement of dispute outside the Court

This Section was not there originally and was added by the amendment of 2002 to include settlement of
disputes outside the Court by way of alternative dispute resolution methods in the CPC. Hence, the
cases referred to alternative dispute resolution could be settled quickly and the defendants in this way
could be spared from the injury of a long time waiting for the disposal of matters in the ordinary run.

 Section 100A No further appeal in certain cases

This Section was substituted by a new Section by the Amendment Act of 2002. Section 100A states that
there shall be no further appeal in case an appeal has arisen out of an original or appellate decree or
order and is heard and decided by a single Judge of the High Court.

 Section 102 – No second Appeal in certain cases

This section was amended to enlarge the scope of Section 102. It now provides that there will be no
second appeal from any decree in cases where the subject matter of the original suit for recovery of
money is up to 25,000 rupees. Prior to amendment Section 102 was confined to the suit of which the
cognizance can be taken by the Small Causes Court and the amount was limited to 3000 rupees.

 Order V – issue and service of summons

Under this, the summons was to be delivered through a proper officer of the court only. The
amendment subsequently provides that the summons may now be delivered by the officer of the court
or at the expense of the plaintiff through the courier service approved by the Court. Moreover, the
Plaintiff can himself impact the service of summons on an application being made by him to the court.
This helps speed up the process and has been done to reduce delay at the previous stage by permitting
the use of a courier, email, fax for serving summons which was regarded as illicit until now.

 Order VI – Pleadings generally

Rule 17 and Rule 18 of Order VI were deleted by the Amendment Act of 1999 and was reinstituted by
the amendment in 2002. A new provision has been added which provides that a person has to an
affidavit in support of his pleadings while verifying the pleadings. Further, once the trial has
commenced, no application for amendment will be allowed except when the Court arrives at the
conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter prior to the
commencement of the trial.

 Written Submission

After the Amendment in 2002, the parties now have to file written submissions within 30 days from the
date of summons which can be extended up to 90 days.

 Order XVII: Adjournment

The amendment Act has fixed an upper limit of 3 adjournments in a civil case and could only be granted
based upon a written application.

Proposed reforms

 Fast Track Court (FTC)

Fast Track Courts were established in India in the year 2000. These are special courts set up for speedy
disposal of long-pending cases in the lower Courts. This helps speed up the litigation process. The State
Government is empowered to establish FTC in consultation with the High Court. The establishment of
1734 FTC’s was suggested to be set up by the 11th Law Commission of India The Commission also
allocated 500 crores in this regard. It also recommended that there should be five FTC’s on average in
every district with preference to be given to those districts or states with huge pendency of cases. The
Judges in the FTC’s are to be appointed on an ad hoc basis. Of the total 1734 FTC’s, only 1562 were
functional by the year 2005 and 1192 by 2011.
  Lok Adalat

Also known as the people’s court is one of the Alternative Dispute Resolution methods in India. Lok
Adalats are established under the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 to settle long-pending cases before
any Court or cases which are at the pre-litigation stage. The award passed under the Act is considered to
be a decree of the Civil Court. The parties if not satisfied with the award of the Lok Adalat are free to
initiate the proceeding in the Civil Court having appropriate jurisdiction. Since its inception around 15.14
lakh Lok Adalats have been organized in India and so far more than 8.25 crores have been settled
through Lok Adalat.

Mobile Lok Adalats: Mobile Lok Adalats are organized across the nation. These Courts travel to various
parts of the country from one place to another to resolve disputes through this mechanism.

 Commercial Courts

Commercial Courts deal with commercial disputes which relate to any alleged dispute relating to the
invoice, price, late delivery, etc. The commercial courts were established under the Commercial Courts
Act, 2015. The Act provides for the establishment of the commercial court and division in the High Court
to adjudge commercial disputes to minimize the load on the Civil Courts

 Filling up of vacancies of the judges and increase in the number of courts

Since there are many vacant posts of judges in the courts there is an urgent need to fill up the vacancies
so as to reduce the burden of the Court in disposing of the cases. The existing number of courts is not
adequate and increased number of judges would require more courtrooms.

 Adherence to Section 89 of CPC

Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code relating to out of court settlement should be strictly complied
with. There is no good reason to continue a case in the court where it is plausible to be settled outside
the Court. The Courts should encourage the parties to settle a matter by amicable means rather than in
Court which will help in reducing the workload of the Court and also in maintaining the relation of
parties as well.

 Reduction of delay in filing of written statements

The court should strictly adhere to Order VIII of CPC in order to save the time of the Court.

 Unnecessary adjournment

Unnecessary and frequent adjournments should be avoided and there should be a check on these
adjournments. The rules of Order XVII of CPC should be followed properly.
Conclusion

Every person has a right to speedy trial and refusal to timely justice results in no justice. Pendency of
cases for a long time defeats the whole idea of justice and loses people’s confidence in the judiciary.
With the number of cases currently pending in India, there are certain cases that are pending in the
Courts for more than 10 or maybe 20 years. The changes brought by the Amendments in 1999 and 2002
to the CPC are basic in nature yet have sweeping results as far as working of Civil Courts in the nation is
concerned if they are properly followed. How long should it take to dispose of a case depends upon the
facts and circumstances of each case. It is not suggested that there should be justice quickly but without
observing the procedures of the Code and hastily disposing of the case by the Judges without
considering the material evidence and due hearing in every case.

7. Explain the meaning, nature and object of the law of limitation. 12

Ans: Introduction

The law of limitation finds its root in the maxims “Interest Reipublicae Ut Sit Finis Litium” which means
that in the interest of the state as a whole there should be a limit to litigation and “vigilantibus non
dormientibus Jura subveniunt” which means the law will assist only those who are vigilant with their
rights and not those who sleep upon it. The law of limitation specifies the statutory time frame within
which a person may initiate a legal proceeding or a legal action can be brought. If a suit is filed after the
expiry of the time prescribed it will be barred by the Limitation. It means that a suit brought before the
Court after the expiry of the time within which a legal proceeding should’ve been initiated will be
restricted.

Object of the Act

The Law of limitation prescribes a time period within which a right can be enforced in a Court of Law.
The time period for various suits has been provided in the schedule of the Act. The main purpose of this
Act is to prevent litigation from being dragged for a long time and quick disposal of cases which leads to
effective litigation. As per the Jammu and Kashmir Re-organisation Act, 2019, provisions of the
Limitation Act will now apply to the whole of India. The Limitation Act, 1963 contains provisions relating
to the computation of time for the period of limitation, condonation of delay, etc. The Limitation Act
contains 32 sections and 137 articles and the articles are divided into 10 parts.

 Retrospective Operation

In BK Education Services Private Limited v. Parag Gupta and Associates, the Supreme Court clarified that
since the law of limitation is procedural in nature, it will be applied retrospectively. The Supreme Court
in Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd v. Union of India observed that statutes of limitation are retrospective so far
as they apply to all legal proceedings brought after their operations for enforcing causes of action
accrued earlier. In Excise and Taxation v. M/S Frigoglass India Private Ltd, the Punjab and Haryana High
Court ruled that It is well-settled that the law of limitation is a procedural law and operates
retrospectively unless it has been provided differently in the amending statute. In other words, unless
there is a contrary intention manifested by express or necessary implication of the legislation itself,
procedural law is generally retrospective law.

 Limitation Bars Remedy

Section 3 lays down the general rule that if any suit, appeal or application is brought before the Court
after the expiry of the prescribed time then the court shall dismiss such suit, appeal or application as
time-barred. The law of limitation only bars the judicial remedy and does not extinguish the right. In
other words, It means that the statute of limitation prescribes only the period within which legal
proceedings have to be initiated. It does not restrict any period for setting up a defence to such actions.
Hence, the original right to suit is not barred. However, Section 27 is an exception to this rule.

The Supreme Court in Punjab National Bank and Ors v. Surendra Prasad Sinha held that the rules of
limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties. Section 3 only bars the remedy but does
not destroy the right which the remedy relates to.

In case of Against the Judgement in As 15/1996 v. K.J Anthony, the Court held that a defendant in a suit
can put forward any defence though such defence may not be enforceable in the court, for being barred
by limitation.

It was held in Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing v. State of Bombay that the statute of limitations only
bars the remedy but does not extinguish the debt.

 Limitation Does Not Bar Defence

The law of limitation does not restrict the defendant if he raises a legitimate plea in his defence even
though the suit is time-barred. It was held in Rullia Ram Hakim Rai v. Fateh Singh, the bar of limitation
does not stand in the way of defence. It only bars action and it is only its recovery that is time-barred.
There is no provision that prohibits or prevents a debtor from clearing his time-barred outstandings.

The Supreme Court observed in Shrimant Shamrao Suryavanshi v. Pralhad Bhairoba Suryavanshi, the
Limitation Act takes away the plaintiff’s remedy to enforce his rights by bringing an action in a court of
law, but it does not place any restriction on the defendant to put forward his defence though such
defence is barred by limitation and is unenforceable in the Court.

Application to courts

Under Section 3(c), an application by a notice of motion in a High Court can be made when the
application is presented to the proper officer of that court. If the period prescribed for any application
expires on the day on which the court is closed, the application shall be made on the day on which the
court reopens as per Section 4.

 Plea of limitation: Duty of Court

The Court is under an obligation to dismiss a suit if it is filed beyond the time prescribed by the
Limitation Act. The provisions of Section 3 are mandatory and the Court will not proceed with the suit if
it is barred by time. Under Section 3 of the Act, it is clearly mentioned that every suit instituted, appeal
preferred and the application made after the prescribed period shall be dismissed. Even though
limitation has not been set up as a defence.

It was held in Craft Centre v. Koncherry Coir Factories, it is the duty of the plaintiff to convince the Court
that his suit is within time. If it is out of time and the plaintiff relies on any acknowledgments in order to
save the limitations then he has to plead them or prove, if denied. The Court further held that, provision
of Section 3 is absolute and mandatory and if a suit is barred by the time the court is under a duty to
dismiss the suit even at the appellate stage though the issue of limitation may not have been raised. It
was held in ICICI Bank Ltd v. Trishla Apparels Pvt Ltd that there is no doubt that the court is duty-bound
to dismiss the suit in a case if it is barred by time even though no such plea has been taken by the
opposite party.

In Mukund Ltd v. Mumbai International Airport, it was ruled that it is explicitly clear that when a suit is
barred by limitation, the Court is precluded from proceeding on the merits of the contentions and in fact
is obliged to dismiss the suit.

 Starting point of Limitation

The time from which period of limitation begins to run depends upon the subject matter of the case and
a specific starting point of such period is provided extensively by the Schedule in the Act. It generally
starts from the date when the summons or notice is served, or the date on which the decree or
judgment is passed, or the date on which the event that forms the basis of the suit takes place. The
Supreme Court in Trustee’s Port Bombay v. The Premier Automobile held that the starting point of
limitation is the accrual of the cause of action.

 Expiry Period of Limitation When Court is Closed

When a court is closed on a certain day and the period of limitation expires on that day, then any suit,
appeal or application shall be taken up to the Court on the day on which it reopens. This means that a
party is prevented not by his own fault but because of the Court being closed on that day. Section 4 of
the Limitation Act provides that when the period of limitation is prescribed for any suit, appeal or
application and such period expires on a day when the Court is closed, such suit, appeal or application
shall be instituted, preferred or made on the day on which the Court reopens. The explanation to this
section mentions that within the meaning of this Section a Court shall be deemed to be closed on any
day if during any part of the normal working of the Court it remains closed on that day.

For instance, if a Court reopens on 1st January and the time for filing the appeal expires on 30th
December (the day on which the Court remains closed) then the appeal can be preferred on the 1st of
January when the Court reopens.

Conclusion

The law of limitation prescribes the time within which a person can enforce his legal right. This Act keeps
a check on the cases so that they are not dragged for over a long time. This Act also recognizes the fact
that there are situations when persons instituting a suit or preferring an appeal for a genuine cause are
unable to institute a suit within the time prescribed in the Act and the same criteria cannot be applied to
every situation.

Or

"When once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to sue stops it." Explain. State
the exceptions, if any. 12

Ans: Introduction

The ‘Law of Limitation’ provides an aggrieved party with the time limit for different suits within which
the party can approach the court for relief. The suit is dismissed by the competent court where the time
limit provided by the limitation act expires. A situation may exist where, due to his physical or mental
condition, the person is not able to file a suit or make an application. In such cases, the law may not be
the same and additional rights and benefits may be accorded to individuals with disabilities.

The concept of legal disability is provided under Section 6 of the Limitation Act,1963 which further
extends to Sections 7, 8 and 9.

Section 6 of the Limitation Act,1963

Legal disability: (1) Where a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution
of a decree is, at the time from which the prescribed period is to be reckoned, a minor or insane, or an
idiot, he may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after the disability has
ceased, as would otherwise have been allowed from the time specified there for in the third column of
the Schedule.

(2) Where such person is, at the time from which the prescribed period is to be reckoned, affected by
two such disabilities, or where, before his disability has ceased, he is affected by another disability, he
may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after both disabilities have ceased,
as would otherwise have been allowed from the time so specified.

(3) Where the disability continues up to the death of that person, his legal representative may institute
the suit or make the application within the same period after the death, as would otherwise have been
allowed from the time so specified.

(4) Where the legal representative referred to in sub-section (3) is, at the date of the death of the
person whom he represents, affected by any such disability, the rules contained sub-sections (1) and (2)
shall apply.

(5) Where a person under disability dies after the disability ceases but within the period allowed to him
under this section, his legal representative may institute the suit or make the application within the
same period after the death, as would otherwise have been available to that person had he not died.

Explanation —for the purposes of this section, ‘minor’ includes a child in the womb.
The section deals with following types of disabilities:

 Minority
 Insanity
 Idiocy

Minority

Minor is a person who has not attained the age of 18 years according to Indian Majority Act, 1875. The
calculation of the age has to be done according to Section 3(2) of the Majority Act, 1875 - In computing
the age of any person, the day on which he was born is to be included as a whole day and he shall be
deemed to have attained majority at the beginning of the eighteenth anniversary of that day.

Insanity

It means unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents someone from having
the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that
releases someone from criminal or civil responsibility.

In the case of S.K.Yadav v. State of Maharashtra (2009), the concept of insanity has been dealt with in
detail by the Supreme Court and the court opined that only legal insanity is recognized by law and not
the medical insanity.

Another case on the point of insanity is that of Hari Singh Gond v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2008) in
which the Supreme Court categorized insanity into further four categories:

 When one is an idiot;

 When one is made non compos by illness
 When one is a lunatic or a mad man and
 When one is drunk.

Idiocy

A person who acts in an extremely foolish way is said to be an idiot. Idiocy is not an acquired form of
mental instability, rather a person is an idiot since his/her birth.

Computation of Limitation Period in case of Legal Disability

Persons with insanity, minority and idiocy as disabilities are exempted under Section 6 to file a suit or an
application for the execution of the order in the time prescribed by the law. They are allowed to file a
suit or an application when their disability has ceased and counting the period starts from the day their
disability comes to an end.

Who is entitled to the benefit of Section 6

It is only a person “entitled to the suit” who can claim benefit of legal disability. Where the person dies
with such disability the ‘Legal Representative’ of such person may sue and all the rules provided by
Section 6 would apply to such legal representative as well.

Accrual of cause of action

The provision provides that the plaintiff must be suffering from the disability at the time when the cause
of action accrues.

In the case of Udhavji Anandji Ladha and Ors. v. Bapudas Ramdas Darbar (1949) Bombay High Court held
that Section 6 does not cover in any way any “intervening” kind of legal disability. When a legal disability
is in existence, only then can Section 6 be successfully applied.

Section 7 of the Limitation Act,1963

Disability of one of several persons.—Where one of several persons jointly entitled to institute a suit or
make an application for the execution of a decree is under any such disability, and a discharge can be
given without the concurrence of such person, time will run against them all; but, where no such
discharge can be given, time will not run as against any of them until one of them becomes capable of
giving such discharge without the concurrence of the others or until the disability has ceased.

Explanation I —This section applies to a discharge from every kind of liability, including a liability in
respect of any immovable property.

Explanation II —For the purposes of this section, the Manager of a Hindu undivided family governed by
the Mitakshara law shall be deemed to be capable of giving a discharge without the concurrence of the
other members of the family only if he is in management of the joint family property.

Section 7 had to be taken as an exception to the general principle set out in Section 6 and provides that
if there were several persons who were jointly entitled to file suits and if one of them were disabled, the
time would not run against either of them until the disability ceased to exist. But if one of the persons
entitled to institute a suit was competent to grant discharge without concurrence from others, then
time would begin to run against both of them.

Section 8 of the Limitation Act,1963

Special exceptions — Nothing in Section 6 or in Section 7 applies to suits to enforce rights of pre-
emption, or shall be deemed to extend, for more than three years from the cessation of the disability or
the death of the person affected thereby, the period of limitation for any suit or application.

This provision provides that if the limitation period is extended under Section 6 or 7 then in no case it
should be extended for more than 3 years. Also, the extension under Section 6 or 7 will not be
applicable to suits for pre-emption.

Section 9 of the Limitation Act,1963

Continuous running of time —Where once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to
institute a suit or make an application stops it: Provided that, where letters of administration to the
estate of a creditor have been granted to his debtor, the running of the period of limitation for a suit to
recover the debt shall be suspended while the administration continues.

Conclusion

Legal disability under Limitation Act includes minority, insanity or mental disability. It serves as a
safeguard to protect individuals who are unable to fully comprehend their legal rights and
responsibilities. By temporarily suspending the ability to initiate legal proceedings, it ensures that
vulnerable individuals are not taken advantage of during periods of diminished capacity. Moreover, it
allows for a fair and equitable legal process, as it requires parties to possess the necessary competence
to actively participate in legal proceedings.

The Limitation Act incorporates various sections, namely Sections 6, 7, 8 and 9, to address different
aspects of legal disability. These sections collectively define the parameters within which legal disability
operates. Section 6 serves as the primary provision, while Sections 7, 8 and 9 further expand on specific
situations where legal disability under Limitation Act may apply.

EDITED BY – KIRTEE KAMAL DAS

LLB 4th SEMESTER (2022 batch)

UNIVERSITY LAW COLLEGE, GAUHATI UNIVERSITY