This article is written by
. The present article is a comprehensive piece of literature which deals with Order 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in a detailed manner. The article covers a detailed explanation of all the rules related to the examination of parties by the court underlying Order 10 along with its purpose and relevance in a civil proceeding. This article also covers the important relevant case laws incidental to Order 10.
The procedural law dealing with civil suits is codified under the (hereinafter referred to as CPC) which came into force on 1st January 1909. CPC is divided into 2 parts, namely; the Sections and the First Schedule wherein all the Orders are dealt. As the process of a civil suit goes through various stages, one such stage is the examination of parties by the court which is dealt with under of CPC. Examination of parties is the stage where the court has the liberty and the authority to question the respective parties to the suit in order to ascertain the accepted and the denied pleadings. It not only ensures transparency and fairness in a civil proceeding but also ensures the administration of justice. The parties are under an obligation to disclose the relevant and important facts incidental to the subject matter of the suit which allows the court to decide for further examination. The rules underlying Order 10 are indispensable while proceeding with a civil suit.
However, before moving towards the detailed explanation of the rules underlying Order 10 of CPC, it is very important to understand various stages of a civil suit and the objective behind examination of parties as stated under Order 10. Let us delve into the brief explanation of these aspects in this article.
A civil suit is initiated between two parties who want their legal dispute over a civil wrong to be addressed in a suitable court of law. A suit of civil nature in India is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. As a process, a civil suit goes through various stages in order to ensure that an appropriate judgement is passed. These stages include:
Cause of action: A civil suit is filed in the court of law only after a party suffers any breach of its right or there is any civil wrong committed by the other party. According to the law laid down in the CPC, the cause of action is nothing but the circumstances which lead to the dispute between the parties.
Filing of suit (Section 26 read with Orders 6, 7 and 8 of CPC): Once, the cause of action is determined by the parties (namely the plaintiff and the defendant in accordance with the provisions of Order 1) which has led to the arising of the dispute, a suit is instituted by the way of a plaint in accordance with the provisions of of CPC. A plaint is a document wherein the plaintiff to the dispute states the facts and the summary of the complaint. It lays the foundation of the entire process of civil litigation.
Issue of summons (Sections 27-32 read with Order 5 of CPC): When a plaint is filed and accepted by the court, the summons is issued upon the defendant to appear before the court within 30 days of the issuance of summons in accordance with the provisions of Order 5 read with – of CPC.
Written statement (Order 8): Upon issuance of summons, the defendant is required to comply with them and appear before the court to file a written statement under Order 8 in reply to the allegations of the plaintiff. However, the defendant is required to specifically deny each allegation.
Appearance of parties (Order 9): As per Order 9, once both the documents are filed and accepted, the parties are required to appear before the court on a fixed date failing to which results in the passing of an against the defendant.
Examination of parties (Order 10): Under the purview of Order 10 of CPC, the court has the authority to examine the parties in order to list down the issues of law and facts. The statements of the parties during the process of examination form a part of the record of the suit.
Framing of issues: Once the parties submit their issues, the court frames the final issues based on the facts of the case. However, the issues framed may be either facts in issue or issues of law.
Examination of witnesses and arguments by the parties: Being an important stage of a civil suit, the plaintiff’s witnesses are examined by their own advocate and then cross-examined by the defendant’s pleader. Once the examination is over, the parties put their arguments before the court. If upon the perusal of the arguments, the court is of the opinion that no substantial issue exists against the defendant, it may dispose of the case at the first hearing in accordance with Orders 12 and 15. However, otherwise, the matter proceeds with the trial under Order 18.
Judgement: Order 20 of CPC read with talks about the judgement. After considering all the arguments of the parties, the court pronounces the judgement followed by the decree.
Order 10 of CPC deals with the examination of parties by the court and the following rules are encompassed under this Order:
Rule 1 of Order 10 deals with the ascertainment of the admitted and denied allegations in pleadings. The court on the first date of hearing, after the plaint and the written statement are submitted, shall ask the parties to either accept or deny the facts stated by them in their respective pleadings. The reason behind this exercise is to reduce the scope of litigation and to dig out the issues of facts and laws regarding the subject matter of the civil suit.
The term “first date of hearing” has been indicated by the Supreme Court in the case of wherein the bench stated that “the first hearing of the suit” can never be earlier than the date fixed for the preliminary examination of the parties (Order 10 Rule 1) and the settlement of issues.”
The above principle was reiterated by the court in stating that Order 10 Rule 1 provides for recording of the statement of the parties to a suit at the “first hearing of the suit” which comes after the framing of the issues and it can never be earlier that the date fixed for the preliminary examination of the parties and the settlement of issues. The words “first date of the hearing” does not mean the day for the return of the summons but the day on which the court applies its mind to determine the issues and evidence.
Rule 1A of Order 10 deals with the court’s direction to the parties to opt for any of the modes of alternate dispute resolution. As per this rule, the court exercising the jurisdiction over a civil suit is duty-bound to encourage the parties to adopt any mode of alternate dispute resolution (hereinafter referred to as ADR) which are mentioned under of CPC. Once, the parties choose the mode of ADR as specified under Section 89, the court for this purpose shall fix the date for the appearance of the parties before the forum or the authority chosen by them.
In pursuance of this Rule, the Supreme Court in held that “neither Section 89 nor Order 10 Rule 1A is intended to supersede or modify the provisions of the or the . Section 89 makes it clear that two of the ADR processes (i.e. arbitration and conciliation) will be governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, two others (i.e. Lok Adalat settlement and mediation) by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and the last of the ADR process by judicial settlement.”
According to Rule 1B of this Order, the parties are bound to appear before the forum for conciliation after the suit is referred to any authority under Rule 1A.
Rule 1C of Order X deals with the appearance of the parties before the court when the efforts of conciliation fail in lieu of Rule 1A. Once the matter is referred to an ADR forum and the presiding officer of that forum is of the opinion that the suit must be decided by a civil court, it can refer the matter back to the civil court which has the jurisdiction over that matter. However, such power of referring the matter to the civil court lies with the presiding officer of the forum only.
Rule 2 of Order 10 talks about the oral examination of the parties and their companions. In order to comprehend the matter in controversy, the court exercising jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit has the power to orally examine the parties and their companions. This enables the court to frame the issues underlying the matter in controversy. The questions can also be put forth to people acting as the companions of the parties in order to get some material answers. The court can orally examine the parties at any later stage of the suit as well.
In the important precedent, , the Apex Court while determining the scope and ambit of Rule 2 of Order 10 stated that where on one hand Rule 1 enables to ascertain the admissions and denials by the parties, Rule 2 is not restrictive to allegations made by other parties, rather, it leads to elucidating any matters of controversy. Through the words of judgement, the Supreme Court stated that “Rule 2 enables the court to examine not only any party, but also any person accompanying either party or his pleader, to obtain answer to any material question relating to the suit, either at the first hearing or subsequent hearings. The object of oral examination under Rule 2 of Order 10 is to ascertain the matters in controversy in suit, and not to record evidence or to secure admissions.”
In another case of , it was held by the court that “framing of issues is a very crucial stage of a civil trial and it is important for a judge to critically examine the pleadings of the parties before framing the issues under Rule 2 of Order 10. In search of truth, the court must go to the core of the matter and eliminate the controversies”.
According to Rule 3 of Order 10, the judge presiding the court must reduce to writing the information provided by the parties during their oral examination which would also form part of the record of the suit.
Rule 4 of this Order refers to the consequence of refusal or inability of the pleader to answer. As this rule suggests, if during the oral examination of parties under Rule 2, the party or its pleader to whom the question is posed either refuses to answer or is unable to answer, the court may adjourn the proceedings and postpone the matter for not more than 7 days in order to ask the parties to appear before the court “in person” to answer the questions. However, if the party or the pleader fails to appear before the court on the date fixed, the court may pronounce the judgement against that party.
There is no particular process that is to be followed to examine the parties. However, it is a common practice that after the issuance of summons and filing of written statements, the parties appear before the court to put forth their arguments. Before the parties put their arguments before the court, they are examined in order to discover the facts and evidence to facilitate the process of trial and enable the court to frame the issues. These discoveries out of the statements of the parties form a part of the record.
The objective behind examining the parties is majorly to ascertain the denied and the accepted allegations of the parties. By the process of examination of parties, the court tries to extract the issues underlying the dispute from the parties. This results in the clarification of issues and gathering of evidence. It also enables the court to form an opinion regarding the reference of the dispute to an appropriate forum of ADR in order to escalate the settlement of the dispute. The stage of examination of parties by court paves the path for further steps to be followed in a suit. Post examination of parties, the court stands in a position to frame the final issues.
Section 89 of CPC aims for the settlement of disputes outside the court by resorting to any of the modes of ADR namely arbitration, conciliation, mediation or by judicial settlement through Lok Adalat. According to this provision, if the court is of the opinion that essential elements of conciliation or judicial settlement exists between the parties, it may either suo moto or on the application of the parties refer the matter to be settled through any of the modes of ADR mentioned above. The court can refer the dispute to any ADR forum at any stage of the proceeding but before the settlement of the issues.
The which came into force on 1st July, 2002 inserted Rule 1A to Order 10. This Rule was inserted to supplement the purpose of the provision under Section 89 of CPC. As mentioned earlier as well, the essence of Rule 1A of Order 10 resonates with the essentials of Section 89. The purpose of both provisions is to ensure that the dispute may be settled amicably through any of the modes of ADR and to reduce the pendency of litigation. While Section 89 results in early settlement of disputes, Rule 1A supplements to the purpose of that provision by referring the matter to a suitable ADR forum. Courts through these provisions try to encourage the parties to opt for a method of settlement of their disputes outside the court which would not just result in their cost management but also will efficiently resolve the dispute.
In a landmark judgement of , the Supreme Court gave a detailed set of guidelines to be followed while resorting to Section 89 along with Rule 1A of Order 10 of CPC. The guidelines issued by the court are summarised as below:
The purpose of the court behind issuing these guidelines was to ensure that the provisions are utilised efficiently to gain the best results out of ADR mechanisms.
In this case, the Supreme Court ascertained the objective and the aim of Rule 2 of Order 10 of CPC. The questions of consideration before the court included the ambit and scope of Rule 2 of Order 10, the court’s confrontation with the defendant of a substantial portion of a document to be examined and to ascertain if an answer given against the question put to a defendant under Rule 2 can prosecute him under (procedure in cases mentioned under ) of the (now as Section 379 of the ).
The court while determining the scope and ambit of Rule 2 of Order 10 stated that where on one hand Rule 1 enables to ascertain the admissions and denials by the parties, Rule 2 is not restrictive to allegations made by other parties, rather, it leads to elucidating any matters of controversy. Through the words of judgement, the Supreme Court stated that “Rule 2 enables the court to examine not only any party, but also any person accompanying either party or his pleader, to obtain answer to any material question relating to the suit, either at the first hearing or subsequent hearings. The object of oral examination under Rule 2 of Order 10 is to ascertain the matters in controversy in suit, and not to record evidence or to secure admissions.”
While deciding the other issues, the court held that Rule 2 is not resorted to decide the rights and obligations of the parties. Also, it was stated by the court that confrontation of a document which is not exhibited lies outside the purview and scope of Rule 2 of Order 10. While deciding the final issue, the bench held that no party can be prosecuted under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the answers given by them against the questions put to them under Order 10 Rule 2.
In this , a civil suit was involved wherein an application was filed by the plaintiff under Order 10 of CPC to challenge the information and the responses provided by the defendant and claimed that those responses were evasive and insufficient. The plaintiff also sought an order to examine the defendant on oath under Order 10 Rule 1 in order to clarify all the issues.
The main issue underlying this case was whether the examination of parties on oath under Order 10 was justified and the discretion of the Sessions Judge to order the same.
The Delhi High Court in this case upheld the decision of the Sessions Judge and held that the latter had the discretion to order an oral examination of parties on oath under Order 10 CPC. It was also held that Order 10 grants an authority to the court to examine the parties if deemed necessary. The court also stressed upon the fact that predicting the exact questions arising from the oral examination of parties was not within its scope.
Through the process of examination of parties under Order 10, the court ensures that all the relevant information is disclosed and extracted through the parties and is documented effectively to form a part of the record of the suit. It is a very crucial stage of a civil suit because it not only helps in the clarification of issues but also aids in the gathering of evidence. In order to ensure a fair and transparent settlement of the issues, it is very important for the parties to comply with the provisions of Order 10. With the interplay of Section 89, Order 10 aids in the speedy and efficient resolution of disputes by referring the matter to any suitable ADR forum. Therefore, there stands no doubt that Order 10 for the examination of parties by the court forms a crucial step in the process of civil litigation.
Order 10 plays a crucial role in deciding a civil suit. It refers to the examination of parties by the court which enables the court to ascertain the underlying issues between the parties. It leads to the discovery of facts, clarification of issues and helps in gathering the evidence. The court having jurisdiction over a dispute by the way of examination of parties tries to discover the hidden issues of law and facts over the subject matter of the dispute.
In general, a party cannot refuse to answer a question posed by the court. However, as per Rule 4 of Order 10, if a party or its pleader refuses to answer any question or they are unable to answer, the court may grant them 7 days to appear “in person” before the court to answer the questions.
The objective behind the insertion of Rule 1A to Order 10 was to ensure speedy and amicable settlement of disputes. It supplements the purpose of the provision under Section 89 of CPC and the court has the authority to refer the matter to any ADR forum if it is of the opinion that the dispute can be resolved by any of the modes of ADR.
The court can refer the parties to any of the ADR forums mentioned in Section 89 namely, arbitral tribunal in case of arbitration, Lok Adalat in case of judicial settlement outside the court, conciliator in case of conciliations and mediators in case of mediation.
As held in Kapil Corepacks Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harbans Lal (2010), the power to identify the matters in controversy by examination of parties at the pre trial stage under Order 10 Rule 2 is completely different from the power exercised by the court under of to put any question in any form to a witness or a party in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts.
Students of regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
Follow us on and subscribe to our channel for more amazing legal content.
The post appeared first on .
Introduction
The procedural law dealing with civil suits is codified under the (hereinafter referred to as CPC) which came into force on 1st January 1909. CPC is divided into 2 parts, namely; the Sections and the First Schedule wherein all the Orders are dealt. As the process of a civil suit goes through various stages, one such stage is the examination of parties by the court which is dealt with under of CPC. Examination of parties is the stage where the court has the liberty and the authority to question the respective parties to the suit in order to ascertain the accepted and the denied pleadings. It not only ensures transparency and fairness in a civil proceeding but also ensures the administration of justice. The parties are under an obligation to disclose the relevant and important facts incidental to the subject matter of the suit which allows the court to decide for further examination. The rules underlying Order 10 are indispensable while proceeding with a civil suit.
However, before moving towards the detailed explanation of the rules underlying Order 10 of CPC, it is very important to understand various stages of a civil suit and the objective behind examination of parties as stated under Order 10. Let us delve into the brief explanation of these aspects in this article.
Stages of a civil suit
A civil suit is initiated between two parties who want their legal dispute over a civil wrong to be addressed in a suitable court of law. A suit of civil nature in India is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. As a process, a civil suit goes through various stages in order to ensure that an appropriate judgement is passed. These stages include:
Cause of action: A civil suit is filed in the court of law only after a party suffers any breach of its right or there is any civil wrong committed by the other party. According to the law laid down in the CPC, the cause of action is nothing but the circumstances which lead to the dispute between the parties.
Filing of suit (Section 26 read with Orders 6, 7 and 8 of CPC): Once, the cause of action is determined by the parties (namely the plaintiff and the defendant in accordance with the provisions of Order 1) which has led to the arising of the dispute, a suit is instituted by the way of a plaint in accordance with the provisions of of CPC. A plaint is a document wherein the plaintiff to the dispute states the facts and the summary of the complaint. It lays the foundation of the entire process of civil litigation.
Issue of summons (Sections 27-32 read with Order 5 of CPC): When a plaint is filed and accepted by the court, the summons is issued upon the defendant to appear before the court within 30 days of the issuance of summons in accordance with the provisions of Order 5 read with – of CPC.
Written statement (Order 8): Upon issuance of summons, the defendant is required to comply with them and appear before the court to file a written statement under Order 8 in reply to the allegations of the plaintiff. However, the defendant is required to specifically deny each allegation.
Appearance of parties (Order 9): As per Order 9, once both the documents are filed and accepted, the parties are required to appear before the court on a fixed date failing to which results in the passing of an against the defendant.
Examination of parties (Order 10): Under the purview of Order 10 of CPC, the court has the authority to examine the parties in order to list down the issues of law and facts. The statements of the parties during the process of examination form a part of the record of the suit.
Framing of issues: Once the parties submit their issues, the court frames the final issues based on the facts of the case. However, the issues framed may be either facts in issue or issues of law.
Examination of witnesses and arguments by the parties: Being an important stage of a civil suit, the plaintiff’s witnesses are examined by their own advocate and then cross-examined by the defendant’s pleader. Once the examination is over, the parties put their arguments before the court. If upon the perusal of the arguments, the court is of the opinion that no substantial issue exists against the defendant, it may dispose of the case at the first hearing in accordance with Orders 12 and 15. However, otherwise, the matter proceeds with the trial under Order 18.
Judgement: Order 20 of CPC read with talks about the judgement. After considering all the arguments of the parties, the court pronounces the judgement followed by the decree.
Rules underlying Order 10 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
Order 10 of CPC deals with the examination of parties by the court and the following rules are encompassed under this Order:
Order 10 Rule 1
Rule 1 of Order 10 deals with the ascertainment of the admitted and denied allegations in pleadings. The court on the first date of hearing, after the plaint and the written statement are submitted, shall ask the parties to either accept or deny the facts stated by them in their respective pleadings. The reason behind this exercise is to reduce the scope of litigation and to dig out the issues of facts and laws regarding the subject matter of the civil suit.
The term “first date of hearing” has been indicated by the Supreme Court in the case of wherein the bench stated that “the first hearing of the suit” can never be earlier than the date fixed for the preliminary examination of the parties (Order 10 Rule 1) and the settlement of issues.”
The above principle was reiterated by the court in stating that Order 10 Rule 1 provides for recording of the statement of the parties to a suit at the “first hearing of the suit” which comes after the framing of the issues and it can never be earlier that the date fixed for the preliminary examination of the parties and the settlement of issues. The words “first date of the hearing” does not mean the day for the return of the summons but the day on which the court applies its mind to determine the issues and evidence.
Order 10 Rule 1A
Rule 1A of Order 10 deals with the court’s direction to the parties to opt for any of the modes of alternate dispute resolution. As per this rule, the court exercising the jurisdiction over a civil suit is duty-bound to encourage the parties to adopt any mode of alternate dispute resolution (hereinafter referred to as ADR) which are mentioned under of CPC. Once, the parties choose the mode of ADR as specified under Section 89, the court for this purpose shall fix the date for the appearance of the parties before the forum or the authority chosen by them.
In pursuance of this Rule, the Supreme Court in held that “neither Section 89 nor Order 10 Rule 1A is intended to supersede or modify the provisions of the or the . Section 89 makes it clear that two of the ADR processes (i.e. arbitration and conciliation) will be governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, two others (i.e. Lok Adalat settlement and mediation) by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and the last of the ADR process by judicial settlement.”
Order 10 Rule 1B
According to Rule 1B of this Order, the parties are bound to appear before the forum for conciliation after the suit is referred to any authority under Rule 1A.
Order 10 Rule 1C
Rule 1C of Order X deals with the appearance of the parties before the court when the efforts of conciliation fail in lieu of Rule 1A. Once the matter is referred to an ADR forum and the presiding officer of that forum is of the opinion that the suit must be decided by a civil court, it can refer the matter back to the civil court which has the jurisdiction over that matter. However, such power of referring the matter to the civil court lies with the presiding officer of the forum only.
Order 10 Rule 2
Rule 2 of Order 10 talks about the oral examination of the parties and their companions. In order to comprehend the matter in controversy, the court exercising jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit has the power to orally examine the parties and their companions. This enables the court to frame the issues underlying the matter in controversy. The questions can also be put forth to people acting as the companions of the parties in order to get some material answers. The court can orally examine the parties at any later stage of the suit as well.
In the important precedent, , the Apex Court while determining the scope and ambit of Rule 2 of Order 10 stated that where on one hand Rule 1 enables to ascertain the admissions and denials by the parties, Rule 2 is not restrictive to allegations made by other parties, rather, it leads to elucidating any matters of controversy. Through the words of judgement, the Supreme Court stated that “Rule 2 enables the court to examine not only any party, but also any person accompanying either party or his pleader, to obtain answer to any material question relating to the suit, either at the first hearing or subsequent hearings. The object of oral examination under Rule 2 of Order 10 is to ascertain the matters in controversy in suit, and not to record evidence or to secure admissions.”
In another case of , it was held by the court that “framing of issues is a very crucial stage of a civil trial and it is important for a judge to critically examine the pleadings of the parties before framing the issues under Rule 2 of Order 10. In search of truth, the court must go to the core of the matter and eliminate the controversies”.
Order 10 Rule 3
According to Rule 3 of Order 10, the judge presiding the court must reduce to writing the information provided by the parties during their oral examination which would also form part of the record of the suit.
Order 10 Rule 4
Rule 4 of this Order refers to the consequence of refusal or inability of the pleader to answer. As this rule suggests, if during the oral examination of parties under Rule 2, the party or its pleader to whom the question is posed either refuses to answer or is unable to answer, the court may adjourn the proceedings and postpone the matter for not more than 7 days in order to ask the parties to appear before the court “in person” to answer the questions. However, if the party or the pleader fails to appear before the court on the date fixed, the court may pronounce the judgement against that party.
Process of examination of parties
There is no particular process that is to be followed to examine the parties. However, it is a common practice that after the issuance of summons and filing of written statements, the parties appear before the court to put forth their arguments. Before the parties put their arguments before the court, they are examined in order to discover the facts and evidence to facilitate the process of trial and enable the court to frame the issues. These discoveries out of the statements of the parties form a part of the record.
Objective behind examining the parties
The objective behind examining the parties is majorly to ascertain the denied and the accepted allegations of the parties. By the process of examination of parties, the court tries to extract the issues underlying the dispute from the parties. This results in the clarification of issues and gathering of evidence. It also enables the court to form an opinion regarding the reference of the dispute to an appropriate forum of ADR in order to escalate the settlement of the dispute. The stage of examination of parties by court paves the path for further steps to be followed in a suit. Post examination of parties, the court stands in a position to frame the final issues.
Interplay between Section 89 and Order 10 CPC
Section 89 of CPC aims for the settlement of disputes outside the court by resorting to any of the modes of ADR namely arbitration, conciliation, mediation or by judicial settlement through Lok Adalat. According to this provision, if the court is of the opinion that essential elements of conciliation or judicial settlement exists between the parties, it may either suo moto or on the application of the parties refer the matter to be settled through any of the modes of ADR mentioned above. The court can refer the dispute to any ADR forum at any stage of the proceeding but before the settlement of the issues.
The which came into force on 1st July, 2002 inserted Rule 1A to Order 10. This Rule was inserted to supplement the purpose of the provision under Section 89 of CPC. As mentioned earlier as well, the essence of Rule 1A of Order 10 resonates with the essentials of Section 89. The purpose of both provisions is to ensure that the dispute may be settled amicably through any of the modes of ADR and to reduce the pendency of litigation. While Section 89 results in early settlement of disputes, Rule 1A supplements to the purpose of that provision by referring the matter to a suitable ADR forum. Courts through these provisions try to encourage the parties to opt for a method of settlement of their disputes outside the court which would not just result in their cost management but also will efficiently resolve the dispute.
In a landmark judgement of , the Supreme Court gave a detailed set of guidelines to be followed while resorting to Section 89 along with Rule 1A of Order 10 of CPC. The guidelines issued by the court are summarised as below:
- If the reference is to arbitration or conciliation, the court has to record that the reference is by mutual consent. Nothing further needs to be stated in the order sheet.
- If the reference is to any other ADR process, the court should briefly record that having regard to the nature of dispute, the case deserves to be referred to Lok Adalat, or mediation or judicial settlement, as the case may be. There is no need for an elaborate order for making the reference.
- The requirement in Section 89(1) that the court should formulate or reformulate the terms of settlement would only mean that the court has to briefly refer to the nature of dispute and decide upon the appropriate ADR process.
- If the judge in charge of the case assists the parties and if settlement negotiations fail, he should not deal with the adjudication of the matter, to avoid apprehensions of bias and prejudice. It is therefore advisable to refer cases proposed for judicial settlement to another judge.
The purpose of the court behind issuing these guidelines was to ensure that the provisions are utilised efficiently to gain the best results out of ADR mechanisms.
Important case law
M/s Kapil Corepacks Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harbans Lal (2010)
In this case, the Supreme Court ascertained the objective and the aim of Rule 2 of Order 10 of CPC. The questions of consideration before the court included the ambit and scope of Rule 2 of Order 10, the court’s confrontation with the defendant of a substantial portion of a document to be examined and to ascertain if an answer given against the question put to a defendant under Rule 2 can prosecute him under (procedure in cases mentioned under ) of the (now as Section 379 of the ).
The court while determining the scope and ambit of Rule 2 of Order 10 stated that where on one hand Rule 1 enables to ascertain the admissions and denials by the parties, Rule 2 is not restrictive to allegations made by other parties, rather, it leads to elucidating any matters of controversy. Through the words of judgement, the Supreme Court stated that “Rule 2 enables the court to examine not only any party, but also any person accompanying either party or his pleader, to obtain answer to any material question relating to the suit, either at the first hearing or subsequent hearings. The object of oral examination under Rule 2 of Order 10 is to ascertain the matters in controversy in suit, and not to record evidence or to secure admissions.”
While deciding the other issues, the court held that Rule 2 is not resorted to decide the rights and obligations of the parties. Also, it was stated by the court that confrontation of a document which is not exhibited lies outside the purview and scope of Rule 2 of Order 10. While deciding the final issue, the bench held that no party can be prosecuted under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the answers given by them against the questions put to them under Order 10 Rule 2.
Dr. Vimla Menon and another vs. Gopinath Menon (2022)
In this , a civil suit was involved wherein an application was filed by the plaintiff under Order 10 of CPC to challenge the information and the responses provided by the defendant and claimed that those responses were evasive and insufficient. The plaintiff also sought an order to examine the defendant on oath under Order 10 Rule 1 in order to clarify all the issues.
The main issue underlying this case was whether the examination of parties on oath under Order 10 was justified and the discretion of the Sessions Judge to order the same.
The Delhi High Court in this case upheld the decision of the Sessions Judge and held that the latter had the discretion to order an oral examination of parties on oath under Order 10 CPC. It was also held that Order 10 grants an authority to the court to examine the parties if deemed necessary. The court also stressed upon the fact that predicting the exact questions arising from the oral examination of parties was not within its scope.
Conclusion
Through the process of examination of parties under Order 10, the court ensures that all the relevant information is disclosed and extracted through the parties and is documented effectively to form a part of the record of the suit. It is a very crucial stage of a civil suit because it not only helps in the clarification of issues but also aids in the gathering of evidence. In order to ensure a fair and transparent settlement of the issues, it is very important for the parties to comply with the provisions of Order 10. With the interplay of Section 89, Order 10 aids in the speedy and efficient resolution of disputes by referring the matter to any suitable ADR forum. Therefore, there stands no doubt that Order 10 for the examination of parties by the court forms a crucial step in the process of civil litigation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is the relevance of Order 10 in a civil suit?
Order 10 plays a crucial role in deciding a civil suit. It refers to the examination of parties by the court which enables the court to ascertain the underlying issues between the parties. It leads to the discovery of facts, clarification of issues and helps in gathering the evidence. The court having jurisdiction over a dispute by the way of examination of parties tries to discover the hidden issues of law and facts over the subject matter of the dispute.
Can a party refuse to answer the questions put forth by the court under Order 10?
In general, a party cannot refuse to answer a question posed by the court. However, as per Rule 4 of Order 10, if a party or its pleader refuses to answer any question or they are unable to answer, the court may grant them 7 days to appear “in person” before the court to answer the questions.
What is the objective behind the insertion of Rule 1A in Order 10?
The objective behind the insertion of Rule 1A to Order 10 was to ensure speedy and amicable settlement of disputes. It supplements the purpose of the provision under Section 89 of CPC and the court has the authority to refer the matter to any ADR forum if it is of the opinion that the dispute can be resolved by any of the modes of ADR.
Which forums of ADR can be referred to at the direction of the court?
The court can refer the parties to any of the ADR forums mentioned in Section 89 namely, arbitral tribunal in case of arbitration, Lok Adalat in case of judicial settlement outside the court, conciliator in case of conciliations and mediators in case of mediation.
Is the power to identify the matters in controversy under Order 10 Rule 2 differ from the power exercised by the court under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act?
As held in Kapil Corepacks Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harbans Lal (2010), the power to identify the matters in controversy by examination of parties at the pre trial stage under Order 10 Rule 2 is completely different from the power exercised by the court under of to put any question in any form to a witness or a party in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts.
Reference
- Civil Procedure by C.K. Takwani.
Students of regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
Follow us on and subscribe to our channel for more amazing legal content.
The post appeared first on .