# oath including special oath or otherwise

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 52/lVh-14
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 2008-03-13
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 52/lVh-14
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/oath-including-special-oath-or-otherwise-162131
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

116
Some specific instances in which cases should in no event be treated as having
been decided after full trial are given below. The list is not exhaustive but is only
illustrative:-
(a) Suit decided on the statement of one party or both or their counsel whether on
oath including special oath or otherwise.
(b) Suit decided on the statement of any person (referee) whether on oath including
special oath or otherwise.
(c) Suit decreed ex parte or dismissed in default, whether on merits under Order
XVII, rule 3, Civil Procedure Code or otherwise.
(d) Suit decided on admission of claim or on compromise.
(e) Suit compromised substantially and only a minor issue, e.g., of cost is left for
decision by the Court.
(f) Suit decided on reference to arbitration, irrespective of whether objections to
the award were filed or not (such objections should be heard on days fixed for
miscellaneous work).
(g) Suit decided on local inspection alone.
(h) Suit decided as a result of which plaint is to be returned for presentation before
a competent court.
(i)
Suit dismissed on the question of jurisdiction though after contest.
(j)
Suit decided on the plantiff being permitted to withdraw the plaint with liberty
to institute a fresh suit.
(k) Suit disposed of by transfer to another court.
(1) Passing of a final decree in a mortgage suit. The suit is deemed to have been
decided after a preliminary decree is passed.
Every judicial officer should give a correct statement of his outturn of work and if
any officer is found to have deliberately submitted incorrect figures, he would be open to
severe censure.
C.L. No. 52/lVh-14 dated 12th August, 1949
The above instructions (issued in Circular letter no. 41/IVh-14, dated the 16th
May, 1949) are equally applicable to all kinds of appeals (other than Miscellaneous
Appeals which are to be heard on Saturdays) with the difference that appeals of the
categories given below shall, for purposes of computing the outturn of work, be deemed
to have been "decided after full trial" or "after hearing" if decided on merits after hearing
the party or parties to the case:

(i)
Appeals decided ex parte on merits.
(ii)
Appeals against an order directing the plaint to be returned for
presentation before a competent court.

(iii)
Appeals against an order dismissing the suit on the question of
jurisdiction.
117
(iii)
EXCLUDING OF DAYS FOR CALCULATION OF WORKING DAYS
C.L. No.C-26/1994, dated 15th March, 1994
I am directed to say that it has come to the notice of the Court that the Judicial
Officers are claiming the whole day on which the courts are closed for half day due to sad
demise of Advocates or other causes in accordance with the provisions contained in subpara 2 (a) of Schedule „E‟ of the Court‟s G.L. No. l/IVh-14/90, dated 8.11.1990, for the
purpose of calculating the number of working days in their quarterly statement of outturn, which are incorrect. They should be asked to claim only for half day instead of the
whole day on which the courts are closed for half day due to sad demise of Advocate or
other causes as mentioned in sub-para 2 (a) of Schedule „E‟ of the aforesaid court‟s
General Letter, in calculating their working days in their out-turn of quarterly statements,
in future.
It may kindly be circulated to all the Judicial Officers working under you for their
kind information and future guidance, so that they may submit their out-turn of quarterly
statements accordingly.
(iii-a) Office Hours for the Judicial Officers
C.L. No. 9/2008 Admin (G); Allahabad: March 13, 2008
It has been noticed by the Hon‟ble Court that the Judicial Officers are not
following the timings as provided in Rule 8 of the General Rules (Civil) which provides
for hours of work in Civil Courts to extend from 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m,, probably under
the wrong notion that these timings are for the staff and not for the Judicial Officers.
Dispelling this misconception the Hon‟ble Court has desired it to be communicated to all
the Judicial Officers that they are supposed to remain present in the Court premises from
10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. and attend to their administrative work from 10.00 a.m. to 10.30
a.m. and from 4.0 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. besides dictating judgements and orders etc. In case
any Judicial Officer has insufficient work he may be provided additional work to keep
him busy from 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m.
Therefore, in continuation of the Circular Letters (C.L. No. 2/Admn. (B) dated
27.2.1971; C.L. No. 47/viii-20-Admin. (G)(B) dated 21.7.1983; C.L. No. 36/VIIIb4/Admin. (G) dated 21.6.1989; C.L. No. 4 dated 3rd February 1976), I am directed to say
that the contents of this Circular Letter may kindly be brought to the notice of all the
Judicial Officer working under your administrative control and it be impressed upon them
that they shall sincerely observe the office timings as mentioned above.
(iv)
Providing Stenographers to ACJMs etc.
C.L. No. 86/Ve-47/Admn.(D), dated 6th September, 1990
I am directed to refer to the Court‟s Circular Letter No. 10/Ve-47/Admn. (D)
dated 6th February, 1990 on the above subject and to say that the lists containing the
names of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates, Munsif Magistrates and Judicial
Magistrates which were circulated with the aforesaid circular letters have by now gone
obsolete as several Officers of the said lists have now been promoted and are working
either as Civil Judge or Chief Judicial Magistrates. It has, therefore, been considered
necessary to prepare a fresh list including 85 more Officers in order of seniority as 85
more posts of stenographers have been created by the Government by G.O. No. U.O.