Skip to main content

What is the difference between order, decree and judgement?


What is the difference between order, decree and judgement?

By swatee Shukla

The decree is defined in the civil procedure code of 1908 CPC as the formal expression of an adjudication that conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit. The decree can only be passed in a suit which is commenced by presentation of a plaint. A decree is a final order. The decree is the final and conclusive order. 

The order of the court is different from the decree, order is a formal expression of the decision of the court, which is not a decree. Section 2(14) of CPC defines the order. Decree and order both are the formal expressions of court, but section 2(14) says that order is a formal expression but not decree, so how these two are different? A decree can be passed in a suit whereas an order may originate from the petition or an application as well. It may or may not conclusively determine the rights of the parties. Suppose if a case is waiting for decree, and any party is unable to produce some document or present in court, the party can request for adjournment order. Now, let's suppose a suit was filed to grant a perpetual injunction(permanently restraining a person to do or not to do any act) but during the trial court grants a temporary injunction, this temporary injunction is an order and when the court will give its final decision, whether perpetual injunction granted or rejection, it would be a decree. A decree may be preliminary or final, or partly preliminary and partly final, but there cannot be a preliminary order. A decree is only one, that is the final decree which is executed but the order can be more than one. Arrest and detention before the judgement is an example of order and acquittal or punishment of accuse is an example of the decree. Every decree is appealable, unless otherwise expressly provided, “ but every order is not appealable. Only those orders are appealable as specified in this case”

Judgement according to the code on the other hand means the statement on the grounds of the decree or order given by the judge. Hence proving a statement is necessary in case of a judgement as opposed to a decree which may or may not have a statement.  The essential elements of the judgement are a concise statement of the case; the points for determination; the decision thereon; and the reasons for such decision. Thus, a judgement contemplates a stage prior to the passing of a decree or an order, and, after the pronouncement of the judgement, a decree shall follow. Judgement has been defined in section 2(9) of the code of civil procedure. A concise statement of the case contains a written statement of the plaintiff and respondent.  It is a concise fact sheet of the case from both sides i.e. plaintiff and respondent. Based on this concise statement, points of determination are made. And this becomes the foundation of resulting judgement. And then the decision thereon and reason of judgement contains based on which evidence and circumstance, the decree is given. A decree must be in a proforma while a paragraph can work for judgement. 


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