Skip to main content

Order 4 CPC - Code of Civil Procedure - INSTITUTION OF SUITS (THE FIRST Schedule)

 Order 4 CPC Description

Order IV


INSTITUTION OF SUITS


1. Suit to be commenced by plaint


(1) Every suit shall be instituted by presenting a 1[plaint in duplicate to the Court] or such officer as it appoints in this behalf.


(2) Every plaint shall comply with the rules contained in Orders VI and VII, so far as they are applicable.


2[(3) The plaint shall not be deemed to by duly instituted unless it complies with the requirements specified in sub-rules (1) and (2).]


HIGH COURT AMENDMENTS


Allahabad.-


In Order IV, in rule 1,-


(a) for sub-rule (1), substitute the following sub-rules, namely:-


"(1) Every suit shall be instituted by presenting to the Court or such officer as it appoints in this behalf a plaint, together with a true copy for service with the summons upon each defendant, unless the Court for good cause shown allows time for filing such copies.


(2) The court-fee chargeable for such service be paid in the case of suits when the plaint is filed and in the case of all other proceedings when the process is applied for."


(b) re-number sub-rule (2) as sub-rule (3).


[Vide Notification No. 4084/35(a)-3(7), dated 24th July, 1926.]


Bombay.-


In Order IV, for rule 1, substitute the following rule, namely:-


"1. Suit to be commenced by a plaint.-


(1) (a) Every suit shall be instituted by presenting a plaint to the Court or such Officer as it appoints in this behalf.


(b) The plaintiff shall, except in the Bombay City Civil court, file as many true copies on plain paper of the plaint with annexes as there are defendants, for service with the summons upon the defendants, unless the Court by reason of the length of the plaint or the number of defendants or for any other sufficient reason permits him to present a like number of concise statements of the nature of the claim made or of the relief claimed in the suit in which case, he shall present such statement. Such copies or statements shall be filed along with the plaint unless the Court, for good cause shown, allows time for filing such copies or statements.


(2) Where the plaintiff sues, or the defendant or any of the defendants is sued, in a representative capacity, such statements shall show in what capacity the plaintiff or the defendant sues or is sued.


(3) The plaintiff may, by leave of the Court, amend such statements so as to make them correspond with the plaint.


(4) The fee, chargeable for service of the summons upon the defendants, shall be paid when the plaint is filed or within such time as may be extended by the Court.


(5) Every plaint shall comply with the rules contained in Orders VI and VII so far as they are applicable."(w.e.f. 1-10-1983)


Madhya Pradesh.-


In Order IV, in rule 1,-


(a) for sub-rule (1), substitute the following sub-rule, namely:-


"(1) Every suit shall be instituted by presenting to the Court or such officer as it appoints in this behalf a plaint, together with as many true copies on plain paper of the plaint as there are defendants, for service with the summons upon each defendant, unless the Court, for good cause shown, allows time for filing such copies."


(b) after sub-rule (1), insert the following sub-rule, namely:-


"(2) The Court-fee chargeable for such service shall be paid in the case of suits when the plaint is filed, and in the case of all other proceedings when the process is applied for."


(c) renumber sub-rule (2) as sub-rule (3). (w.e.f. 29-6-1943)


Rajasthan.-


Substitute sub-rule (1) as in Madhya Pradesh.


[Vide Notification No. 33/SRO, dated 21st July, 1954.]


1. Subs, by Act No. 46 of 1999 section 14 (w.e.f. 1-7-2002) for "plaint to the court".


2. Added by Act No. 46 of 1999 section 14 (w.e.f. 1-7-2002).


2. Register of suits


The Court shall cause the particulars of every suit to be entered in a book to be kept for the purposes and called the resister of civil suits. Such entries shall be numbered in every year according to the Order in which the plaints are admitted.


HIGH COURT AMENDMENTS


Calcutta:-


In Order IV, in rule 2, after the words "particulars of every suit", insert the words "except suits triable by a Court invested with the jurisdiction of a Court of Small Causes under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887". (w.e.f. 1-1-1939)


Gauhati.-


Same as in Calcutta.


STATE AMENDMENTS


Uttar Pradesh-


In its application to the State of Uttar Pradesh after Order IV, the following Order shall be inserted:-


Order IVA


CONSOLIDATION OF CASES


1. Consolidation of suits and proceedings


When two or more suits or proceedings are pending in the same Court, and the Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice, it may by Order direct their joint trial, where upon all such suits and proceedings may be decided upon the evidence in all or any of such suits or proceedings." [U.P. Act 57 of 1976].


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more