Showing : 11-20 of 27 Results

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 2, 3-- Presence of counsel is presence of party - When a party is present and no evidence is led on the adjourned date of hearing then Court is to proceed under rule 3 and not under 2 of order 17 - Order of trial Court proceeding under rule 3 upheld...........
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 2, 3-- Scope and object - O.17.R.2 applies where a party fails to appear on an adjourned date - R.3 applies where a party fails to adduce evidence or perform other duty - Two situations are visualized under R.3 viz. (a) when the parties are present, and (b) when the parties or any of the party is not..........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3-- Presence of Advocate who seeks adjournment and is not prepared to conduct or to defend case - Does not amount to appearance of party for purpose of O.17.R.3 CPC...........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3-- Counsel expressed his inability to go on with the trial and was not in fact prepared to go on with trial but counsel did not report 'no instructions' - Does not amount to appearance of party for purpose of O.17.R.3 CPC...........
KERALA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2007
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3(a)-- Applicability of the provision - Conditions necessary are : (1) Time must have been granted to the party concerned to produce his evidence or cause the attendance of his witnesses or perform any other act necessary for the further progress of the suit; (2) The party failed in doing any of the acts..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2003
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 2, 3-- Basic distinction - Under Rule 2 when any party has failed to appear at the hearing while under Rule 3 the party though present has committed any one or more of the enumerated defaults - Rules 2 and 3 operate in different and distinct sets of circumstances - Rule 2 applies when adjournment has..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2003
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 2-Explanation Rule 3 and Order 9 Rule 6 & 13 - In absence of any indication as to what evidence was evaluated and/or whether, merits were tested - Clearly has imprints of ex parte adjudication - Liable to be set aside under Order 9 Rule 13...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2000
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3-- Closure of evidence - Witness summoned and diet money deposited - If inspite of that witness does not appear party not to be penalised - Provision of O.17.R.3 CPC is penal in character and should be resorted to when the grant of adjournment to the party for adducing its evidence is not at all..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2000
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 2, 3-- Evidence closed by order as defendant No.3 failed to examine witnesses inspite of various opportunities - Merely because another defendant moved application for setting aside ex parte proceedings on date when evidence of defendant No.3 was closed and trial Court adjourned case for reply and..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 17, Rule 3-- Evidence closed - Case not decided forthwith but adjourned for arguments - If the case is not decided forthwith, evidence of the party at fault cannot be closed - The very purpose of the procedure laid down in O.17.R.3 CPC is defeated if case is not decided forthwith - Petitioner granted one..........

Showing : 11-20 of 27 Results