Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Justices BR Gavai, Dipankar Datta and Aravind Kumar gave observation with regards to Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

• The Supreme Court gave this judgment in the case of Asma Lateef & Anr. v. Shabbir Ahmad & Ors.

What is the Background of Asma Lateef & Anr. v. Shabbir Ahmad & Ors. Case?

• The suit was related to a property gifted to the appellants by their great-grandmother.
• In response to their suit, two of the three defendants did not file a written statement resulting to which the trial court pronounced judgment against them.
• SC was dealing with the scenario where defendant fails to submit written statement.

What is the Court’s Observation?

• The SC held that “mere failure or neglect of a defendant to file a written statement controverting the pleaded facts in the plaint, in all cases, may not entitle him to a judgment in his favour unless by adducing evidence he proves his case/claim”.
• The SC dismissed the appeal.

What is Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)?

• About:
  • Order 8 Rule 10 of CPC provides rules regarding written statement.
• Order 8 Rule 10: Procedure when party fails to present written statement called for by Court.—
  • Where any party from whom a written statement is required under rule 1 or rule 9 fails to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the Court, as the case may be, the Court shall pronounce judgment against him, or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit and on the pronouncement of such judgment a decree shall be drawn up:
  • Provided further that no Court shall make an order to extend the time provided under Rule 1 of this Order for filing of the written statement.
• Landmark Case:
  • SC in Balraj Taneja v. Sunil Madan (1999) gave following observations:
    • The court has not to act blindly upon the admission of a fact made by the defendant in his written statement nor should the court proceed to pass judgment blindly merely because a written statement has not been filed by the defendant traversing the facts set out by the plaintiff in the plaint filed in the court.
    • In a case, specially where a written statement has not been filed by the defendant, the court should be a little cautious in proceeding under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC.
    • Before passing the judgment against the defendant it must see to it that even if the facts set out in the plaint are treated to have been admitted, a judgment could possibly be passed in favour of the plaintiff without requiring him to prove any fact mentioned in the plaint.
    • It is a matter of the court's satisfaction and, therefore, only on being satisfied that there is no fact which need be proved on account of deemed admission, the court can conveniently pass a judgment against the defendant who has not filed the written statement.
    • But if the plaint itself indicates that there are disputed questions of fact involved in the case regarding which two different versions are set out in the plaint itself, it would not be safe for the court to pass a judgment without requiring the plaintiff to prove the facts so as to settle the factual controversy.
    • Such a case would be covered by the expression ‘the court may, in its discretion, require any such fact to be proved’ used in sub-rule (2) of Rule 5 of Order 8, or the expression ‘may make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit’ used in Rule 10 of Order 8.