# The examination of the parties or their pleaders at the time of issues under Order

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 22/VIII
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1918-01-31
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 22/VIII
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/the-examination-of-the-parties-or-their-pleaders-at-the-time-of-issues-under-163070
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

127
The examination of the parties or their pleaders at the time of issues under Order
X, rule 1, is not purely discretionary with the presiding officers. Whenever there are any
allegations of fact in the plaint or written statement which have not been expressly or by
necessary implication admitted or denied by opposite party the court is bound to clear up
the pleadings by an examination of the opposite party or his pleader. The omission to do
so often prolongs the trial and gives opportunity for these admissions of false evidence at
later stage.
It is generally the case that the additional pleadings in the written statement
contain fresh allegations of fact and some officers seem to be unaware that it is their duty
before framing issues to find out how for these additional pleas are admitted by the
plaintiff. A simple instance is a suit for redemption of mortgage in which the defendant
sets up two deeds for further charge and alleges that the plaintiff cannot redeem the
mortgage in suit without redeeming these also. The defence my be either-
(1)
a denial of the genuineness of the deeds; or
(2)
an admission of execution of the deeds coupled with the plea that they
have been paid off, or
(3)
an admission that the deeds are genuine and outstanding coupled with the
plea that the mortgage in suit is separately redeemable.
It is obviously important to pin the plaintiff down to a definite case before the suit
goes to trial. In another case the plaintiff sued for the rent of a house. The defendant
alleged that he was the owner of the house and had himself acquired it by purchase, and
adduced a considerable body of evidence to prove this defence. During the course of the
trial the plaintiff was examined as a witness and at once admitted the defendant's title to
the house and stated that what he was claiming was ground rent for the site. If the
plaintiff had been examined at the first hearing under O.X, Rule I, much unnecessary
expense and time would have been saved. [See Order 10 rule 2, amended in 1976].
Order X, rules 1 to 3, Order XIV, rules 1 and 4,
Civil Procedure Code
C.L. No. 22/VIII h dated 18th March,1949
Order X, rule 1, Civil Procedure Code makes it obligatory upon the court to
ascertain from each party or his pleader whether he admits or denies such allegations of
facts as are made in the plaint or written statement, if any, of the opposite party and are
not expressly or by necessary implication admitted or denied by the party against whom
they are made, and to record such admissions and denials. Similarly Order XIV, rule 1(5)
lays down that the court shall after reading the plaint and the written statement, if any,
and after such examination of the parties as may appear necessary ascertain upon what
material propositions of fact or law the parties are variance and shall thereupon proceed
to frame and record the issues.
 The subordinate courts would, therefore, be well advised to read the plaint
immediately after its presentation to point out the defects found therein, and to fix a
reasonable date for the remedying of such defects. Therefore, a date should be fixed for
filing of written statement and another date, say a week later for framing of issues.
Wherever necessary, there should be replication by the plaintiff to admit, deny or to
128
explain the counter allegations, if any, contained in the written statement. The replication
should generally be filed a few days before the date fixed for issues. Before the
settlement of issues in contested cases, except where the plaint if brief and clear the
parties must be examined to clarify the pleadings and to determine the matters under
contest.
 The Judge's notes may also indicate the step taken if any in the light of the above
direction.
Cases for settlement of issues should, as far as possible, be taken up first and the
issues framed in the presence of the parties or their counsel, after obtaining the
admissions and denials of documents filed by the opposite-party. The counsel should
come fully prepared with the facts of the case or should see that the parties are present to
answer any question put by the court suo motu or on the suggestion of the opposite-party.
Issues when framed should be read over to the parties, and if no further issue is pressed, a
note to that effect should be made in the Judge's notes.
Immediately after the issues have been struck the presiding officer should
consider, may be on an application by a party, if the preparation of a site plan or enquiry
after local inspection at the spot is necessary for the proper decision of the case. The
commission should, as far as possible be issued on that very day with clear and detailed
direction to be recorded in the Judge's notes, as to what the Commissioner is required to
show in the plan and on what points he is required to make specific report. If any witness
is to be examined on commission the court may consider the issue of a commission then
and not postpone it till after the recording of the entire oral evidence.
Wherever necessary there should be a replication by the plaintiff to admit, deny or
to explain the counter allegations, if any, contained in the written statement. The
replication should generally be filed a few days before the date fixed for issues. Before
settlement of issues in contested cases, except where the plaint is brief and clear, the
parties must be examined to clarify the pleadings and to determine the matters under
contest.
C.L. No. 66/VII d-148-Admn. (D) dated 24th October,1983
The Courts should make proper use of the powers vested in them under Order X,
Rule 2 C.P.C. not only at the times of framing of the issues, but also at the stage of
evidence to clarify the ambiguity and vagueness in the pleadings and pinpoints dispute
between the parties.
(vi)
 Deciding question of limitation
G.L. No. 277/67-1 dated 31st January, 1918
Whenever an objection is raised that any proceeding is beyond time, the question
of limitation should be determined so far as the court can determine it, after due notice to
all parties.
(vii) Powers of the court to filling the written Statement vis-à-vis the provisions of

order VIII rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure
C.L.No. 26/ Admin. `G`/2005:dated: 9th August, 2005