DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, VIZAG

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE

NAME: PRANJAL MAURYA

ROLL ID: 2014082
SEM: V SEMESTER
FACULTY: Mrs. N. BHAGYALAKSHMI
TOPIC: ISSUES ARE THE BACKBONE OF SUIT ANALYSIS

ACKNOWLEDGEMET

I take immense pleasure in thanking my constitutional law ii teacher for giving me this
opportunity to give a project on ISSUES ARE THE BACKBONE OF SUIT
ANALYSIS
I thank my faculty Mrs. N. BHAGYALAKSHMI, for extending his support in
completion of this project finally, this project would be incomplete without thanking
the almighty who has showered his blessings.

PRANJAL MAURYA
2014082
V SEMESTER

CONTENT

ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INSTITUTION OF SUIT
FRAMING OF ISSUES
GENERAL SUGGESTIONS FOR FRAMING ISSUES
IMPORTANCE OF ISSUE IN SUIT PROCEEDINGS
CASE ANALYSIS
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
RULE 1.270. CONSOLIDATION; SEPARATE TRIALS
(a)
Consolidation.
When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it mayorder a
joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the
actions consolidated;and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may
tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.
(b)
Separate Trials.
The court in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice may order a separate trial
of any claim, crossclaim, counterclaim, or third-party claim or of any separate issue or of
any number of claims,crossclaims, counterclaims, third-party claims, or issues.
RULE 1.280. GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING DISCOVERY
(a)
Discovery Methods.
Parties may obtain discovery by one or more of the following methods: depositions uponoral examination
or written questions; written interrogatories; production of documents or things or permission
toenter upon land or other property for inspection and other purposes; physical and mental examinations; and
requestsfor admission. Unless the court orders otherwise and under subdivision (c) of this
rule, the frequency of use of thesemethods is not limited, except as provided in rule 1.200 and
rule 1.340.
(b)

Scope of Discovery.
Unless otherwise limited by order of the court in accordance with these rules, the scopeof
discovery is as follows:
(1)
In General.
Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subjectmatter of the
pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the
claim ordefense of any other party, including the existence, description, nature, custody,
condition, and location of anybooks, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and
location of persons having knowledge of anydiscoverable matter. It is not ground for
objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if theinformation sought
appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
(2)
Indemnity Agreements.
A party may obtain discovery of the existence and contents of any agreementunder which any
person may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be entered in the action or
toindemnify or to reimburse a party for payments made to satisfy the judgment. Information concerning
the agreementis not admissible in evidence at trial by reason of disclosure.
(3)
Trial Preparation: Materials.
Subject to the provisions of subdivision (b)(4) of this rule, a party mayobtain discovery of
documents and tangible things otherwise discoverable under subdivision (b)(1) of this rule
andprepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or for that
partys representative,including that partys attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer,
or agent, only upon a showing that the partyseeking discovery has need of the materials in the
preparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship toobtain the substantial
equivalent of the materials by other means. In ordering discovery of the materials when
therequired showing has been made, the court shall protect against disclosure of the mental
impressions, conclusions,opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a
party concerning the litigation. Without therequired showing a party may obtain a copy of a
statement concerning the action or its subject matter previouslymade by that party. Upon
request without the required showing a person not a party may obtain a copy of astatement
concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that person. If the request is
refused, theperson may move for an order to obtain a copy. The provisions of rule 1.380(a)(4)
apply to the award of expensesincurred as a result of making the motion. For purposes of this
paragraph, a statement previously made is a writtenstatement signed or otherwise adopted or
approved by the person making it, or a stenographic, mechanical,electrical, or other recording
or transcription of it that is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement by theperson
making it and contemporaneously recorded.
(4)
Trial Preparation: Experts.
Discovery of facts known and opinions held by experts, otherwisediscoverable under the
provisions of subdivision (b)(1) of this rule and acquired or developed in anticipation
of litigation or for trial, may be obtained only as follows:(A) (i) By interrogatories a party
may require any other party to identify each person whom the other partyexpects to call as an

expert witness at trial and to state the subject matter on which the expert is expected to
testify,and to state the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to
testify and a summary of thegrounds for each opinion.(ii) Any person disclosed by
interrogatories or otherwise as a person expected to be called as an expertwitness at trial may
be deposed in accordance with rule 1.390 without motion or order of court.

(iii) A party may obtain the following discovery regarding any person disclosed by
interrogatories orotherwise as a person expected to be called as an expert witness at trial:1.
The scope of employment in the pending case and the compensation for such service.2.
The experts general litigation experience, including the percentage of work performed for
plaintiffsand defendants.3. The identity of other cases, within a reasonable time period, in
which the expert has testified bydeposition or at trial.4. An approximation of the portion of the
experts involvement as an expert witness, which may be basedon the number of hours, percentage of
hours, or percentage of earned income derived from serving as an expertwitness; however,
the expert shall not be required to disclose his or her earnings as an expert witness or
incomederived from other services.An expert may be required to produce financial and business
records only under the most unusual or compellingcircumstances and may not be compelled to
compile or produce nonexistent documents. Upon motion, the court mayorder further discovery by other
means, subject to such restrictions as to scope and other provisions pursuant tosubdivision (b)
(4)(C) of this rule concerning fees and expenses as the court may deem appropriate.(B) A
party may discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or
speciallyemployed by another party in anticipation of litigation or preparation for trial and who is
not expected to be called asa witness at trial, only as provided in rule 1.360(b) or upon a showing of
exceptional circumstances under which it isimpracticable for the party seeking discovery to obtain
facts or opinions on the same subject by other means.(C) Unless manifest injustice would
result, the court shall require that the party seeking discovery pay theexpert a reasonable fee
for time spent in responding to discovery under subdivisions (b)(4)(A) and (b)(4)(B) of
thisrule; and concerning discovery from an expert obtained under subdivision (b)(4)(A) of
this rule the court mayrequire, and concerning discovery obtained under subdivision (b)(4)(B)
of this rule shall require, the party seekingdiscovery to pay the other party a fair part of the
fees and expenses reasonably incurred by the latter party inobtaining facts and opinions from
the expert.(D) As used in these rules an expert shall be an expert witness as defined in rule
1.390(a).

INTRODUCTION:
The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a procedural law; it neither creates nor takes away
any right. It is intended to regulate the procedure to be followed by civil courts. In other
words, the CPC regulates the functioning of civil courts. Civil case is such that it is not
criminal in nature. It is generally on property, business, personal domestic problems,
divorces and such types where ones constitutional and personal rights are breached. In
brief, it lays down the: Procedure of filing a civil case; Powers of court to pass various
orders; Court fees and stamps involved in filing of a case; Rights of the parties to a case
(plaintiff & defendant); Jurisdiction and parameters of civil courts functioning; Specific
rules for proceedings of a case; Right of Appeals, review or reference. In fact, the first
uniform Code of Civil Procedure was enacted in 1859. The present Code of Civil
Procedure was enacted in 1908. The object of the Code is to consolidate and amend the
laws relating to procedure of Civil Judicature. CPC is designed to further the ends of
justice and is not a penal enactment for punishments and penalties. The CPC can be
divided into two parts: (a) the main body of the CPC containing 158 sections; and (b) the
First Schedule, containing 51 Orders and Rules. The Sections deal with matters of a
substantive nature laying down the general principles of jurisdiction, while the First
Schedule relates to the procedure and the method, manner and mode in which the
jurisdiction may be exercised. The body of the CPC containing sections is fundamental
and cannot be amended except by the legislature. The First Schedule of the CPC,

containing Orders and Rules, on the other hand, can be amended by High Courts. The
CPC has no retrospective operation.
INSTITUTION OF SUIT:
SECTION 26 of the Civil Procedure Code says that every suit must be instituted by
presentation of a plaint or in other prescribed manner. In every plaint, the facts must be
proved by affidavits. Plaint is a private memorial submitted to court in writing in which
the person presents his cause of action. Only the person who has got cause of action or his
authorized representative can institute a suit.
Suit must always be instituted by the presentation of the plaint only, and hence any civil
proceeding commenced by means of an application or otherwise does not become a suit.
As per Order 4, Rule 1, the plaint must be submitted in duplicate to the court. Further
every plaint must comply with the rules contained in Order 6 and 7.The plaint must show
in what capacity the plaintiff sues the defendant. While submitting the plaint, the Court
fee for the service of the plaint along with the summons must be paid. As per Rule 2 of
Order 4, the particulars of every suit must be entered in the court register called Register
of civil suits. The entries are serially numbered in every year according to their order of
admission of plaints.1
Court in which suits to be instituted
Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of lowest grade competent to try it. Here
competency refers to pecuniary jurisdiction, which shall be determined by High Court
from time to time.
To reduce the burden of the higher Courts
Afford convenience to the parties and witnesses who may be examined by them in such
suits.
The District Judge and Sub-Ordinate Judges all have jurisdiction over all Original Suits.,
cognizable by the Civil Court subject to the condition suits are to be instituted in a Court
of lowest grade competent to try it.
Suits to be instituted where subject matter situate
Subject to pecuniary and other limitations prescribed by any law, suits for:
1 https://www.scribd.com/doc/91703415/Institution-of-Suit

Recovery of immoveable property with or without rents and profits,

Partition of immoveable property,
Foreclosure, sale, redemption in cases of mortgage or charge upon immoveable
property,
Determination of any other right or interest in immoveable property,
Compensation of wrong to immoveable property,
Recovery of moveable property actually under attachment, Shall be instituted in
Court, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the property is situate. It is also
provided that when suit is filed It obtain relief respecting or compensating any
wrong to any immoveable property,
And relief can be entirely obtained through personal obedience.
In above case, the suit can be instituted either at
Court within whose local limit the property is situated.
Court within whose local jurisdiction the defendant voluntarily resides or conducts
business or trade.
Anand Bazaar Patrika V Biswanath Prasad2
Held a suit for Specific performance for, contract of sale with possession, it has to
be instituted in the Court in whose jurisdiction the property is situated and can not
be filed where cause of action arises.
Seetha Rama Chetty V Kamala Amma
In a suit filed in Bangalore for a property located in Tamilnadu, to determine right
and interest in the immoveable property, Court held that as long as the defendant
is residing within the jurisdiction of Bangalore Court, where the suit is instituted,
the suit was maintainable under S.16(d) read with the proviso.
Suits for immovable property situate within jurisdiction of different Courts
Where the subject matter of the suit, immoveable property, is situated within the local
jurisdiction of two or more different Courts, the suits may be instituted in any Court,
within whose local jurisdiction, a portion of the property is situated, and Court is
2 29 November, 1984,AIR 1986 Pat 57, 1985 (33) BLJR 88

competent to adjudicate over entire suit property, not just portion situated in its
jurisdiction.
Place of institution of suit where local limits of jurisdiction of Courts are uncertain
When it is uncertain as regards under which of the two or more Courts, the territorial
jurisdiction falls into, and one of such Courts has also ascertained such uncertainty, then it
may proceed to entertain and dispose the suit related to the property; after recording the
existence of such uncertainty.3
Chapter 2
Issue of summon
A summon is a legal document that is issued by a Court on a person involved in a legal
proceeding. When a legal action is taken against a person or when any person is required to
appear in the court as a witness in a proceeding, to call upon such person and ensure his
presence on the given date of the proceeding, summons are served.
A summon is served when a suit has been initiated by the plaintiff against the defendant, the
court directs to issue summons to the defendant as this ensures a fair trail. If the summons are
not duly served then no action can be taken against the defendant.
If on serving of the summon and the person against whom it had been issued does not appear
in the court then this will be taken as a Contempt of Court and shall be punished accordingly.
The summons is the descendant of the writ of the common law.
Section 27 and Order 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the service of summons to
the defendant and in the Code of Criminal Procedure, from section 61 to 69 deals with the
topic of summons.
Chapter 3
written statement in civil suit.
WRITTEN STATEMENT(order 8 rule 1 of Cpc.)
Written statement.
The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a
written statement of his defence.
3 http://studentlawnotes.blogspot.in/2012/12/place-of-suing-s15-to-21-cpc.html

Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of
thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day, as may be specified by the
Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days
from the date of service of summons.]
When written statement not filed within thirty days.
When written statement not filed within thirty days.
Procedure when party falls 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 judgement against him, or make such order is relating to the suit as it thinks fit and
on the pronouncement of such judgement a decree shall be drawn u

Chapter 4
ORDER X : EXAMINATION OF PARTIES BY THE COURT
1. Ascertainment whether allegations in pleadings are admitted or denied
At the first hearing of the suit the Court shall ascertain from each party or his pleader
whether he admits or denies such allegations of fact as are made in the plaint or written
statement (if any) of the opposite party, and as are not expressly or by necessary
implication admitted or denied by the party against whom they are made. The Court shall
record such admissions and denials.
57

[2. Oral examination of party, or companion of party

(1) At the first hearing of the suit, the Court-

(a) shall, with a view to elucidating matters in controversy in the suit examine orally
such of the parties to the suit appearing in person or present in Court, as it deems fit; and
(b) may orally examine any person, able to answer any material question relating to
the suit, by whom any party appearing in person or present in Court or his pleader is
accompanied.
(2) At any subsequent hearing, the Court may orally examine any party appearing in
person or present in Court, or any person, able to answer any material question relating to
the suit, by whom such party or his pleader is accompanied.
(3) The Court may, if it thinks fit, put in the course of an examination under this rule
questions suggested by either party.]
58

3. Substance of examination to be written

The substance of the examination shall be reduced to writing by the Judge, and shall form
part of the record.
4. Consequence of refusal or inability of pleader to answer
(1) Where the pleader of any party who appears by a pleader or any such person
accompanying a pleader as is referred to in rule 2, refuses or is unable to answer any
material question relating to the suit which the Court is of opinion that the party whom he
represents ought to answer, and is likely to be able to answer if interrogated in person, the
Court may postpone the hearing of the suit to a future day and direct that such party shall
appear in person on such day.
(2) If such party fails without lawful excuse to appear in person on the day so appointed,
the Court may pronounce judgment against him, or make such order in relation to the suit
as it thinks fit.

Facts
Kapil Corepacks filed a suit against Harbans Lal for recovery of money, alleging that while
Harbans Lal had executed an agreement to sell it an industrial property and had further
received payment towards the agreement, it had refused to convey the property and disclose
adequate documentation regarding the property's proof of title.
Harbans Lal had meanwhile filed a criminal complaint against Kapil Corepacks alleging that
the purported signatures on the agreement were forged. Harbans Lal had additionally filed its
written statement denying the claim and alleging that it had never signed the agreement and
that the signatures were, in fact, clever forgeries.
In the course of the suit proceedings a second appellant, the managing director of the first
defendant, was examined under Order 10, Rule 2(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and
shown a copy of the agreement where only the rubber stamp and the signature on the
document was visible and the rest of the document was covered by blank paper. The High
Court judge made an order (confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court on appeal)
that the second appellant had admitted to his signature on the agreement, as well as the
company's rubber stamp, and was, as such, liable for prosecution under Section 340(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 195(3) of the Penal Code.
Questions for determination

The case related to the scope of Rule 2 of Order 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the
correctness of invoking Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in regard to answers
given by a party in an examination by the court under the rule. The Supreme Court was
specifically concerned with the following questions arising for its consideration:

What is the scope and ambit of Order 10, Rule 2 of the code?

In an examination under Order 10, Rule 2, can a court confront a defendant with only
the signature portion of a disputed unexhibited document filed by the plaintiff (by
covering the remaining portions of the document) and require him or her to identify
the seal/stamp and signature?

On the basis of the answer given by a party in response to a question under Order 10,
Rule 2, can the court prosecute the individual under Section 340 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure read with Section 195 of the Penal Code?

Decision
Scope and ambit of Order 10, Rule 2
Laying down the difference between the scope of Order 10, Rule 1 and Order 10, Rule 2 of
the code, the Supreme Court held that while Rule 1 enables parties to a court proceeding to
admit or deny any counter allegations that may not have been expressly or implicitly admitted
or denied in the pleading itself, Rule 2 is concerned with the broader objective of elucidating
any particular matter that may be controversial in the suit.
The court highlighted that the object of oral examination under Rule 2 is not to record
evidence, inasmuch as the statement made under the aforesaid provision is not under oath nor
intended to be a substitute for a regular examination under oath. The court further clarified
that the purpose of Rule 2 was not to elicit any admissions, which are merely contemplated:

in the pleadings (express or constructive under Order 8, Rule 5 of the code);

during examination of a party by the court under Order 10, Rule 1;

in answers to interrogatories under Order 11, Rule 8;

in response to notice to admit facts under Order 12, Rule 4;

in any evidence or in an affidavit, on oath; and

when any party voluntarily comes forward during the pendency of a suit or
proceedings to make an admission.

The court held that the power under Order 10, Rule 2 cannot be converted into a process of
selective cross-examination by the court, calling on any party to admit a document, before the
party has an opportunity to put forth its case at the trial.
Documents
The court observed that the object of examination under Order 10, Rule 2 was not to prove or
disprove the controversial matters, nor to seek admissions, nor to decide the rights or
obligations of parties. The court highlighted that, had the lower courts merely asked the
second appellant whether he had executed the agreement or not by showing him the
document (by marking the document for purposes of identification only and not as an
exhibit), it might have been possible to justify it as lawful examination under Order 10, Rule
2 read with Order 12, Rule 3A.(4) The attempt in this regard by the lower courts to crossexamine the party by adopting stratagems of covering portions of a document used by crossexamining counsels was strongly condemned by the court.
The court also termed the judge and the Division Bench of the High Court's decisions as
erroneous, having equated the admission by the second appellant of a signature which was
claimed to be a clever forgery by him as an admission of execution of the agreement itself.
The Supreme Court observed that the admission of a signature is not an admission of
execution of a document, and that examination of parties in such a casual manner under
Order 10, Rule 2 was nothing but an anxiety on the part of the lower courts to do justice by
speeding up the suit and ignoring the mandate of Order 10, Rule 2.

Chapter 5

Chapter 9
FRAMING OF ISSUES:

Framing of issues is probably the most important part of the trial. If a judge correct and
accurate issues, it is it possible to come to the correct decision in the shortest possible
time. Inaccurate issues may kill the valuable time. In the case of Siddhi Chunilal Vs.
Suresh Gopkishan 2009(6) BCR 857), it was observed that if correct and accurate issues
were not framed, it leads to gross injustice, delay and waste of the Courts time in
deciding the matter.
The duty in regard to framing of the issue is of the Court which it has to discharge
because it has to try the suit and it has to give notice to parties to lead evidence with
reference to the issues framed. Rule 5 of Order 14, C.P.C. empowers the Court to amend
issues or frame additional issues at any stage of proceedings and it does not contemplate
that the power must be exercised when application is made on the other hand it saddles on
the Court a duty to exercise power suo motu for determining the matters in controversy
between the parties if that was necessary to do so. When the question of exercise of
jurisdiction is in issue that is to be considered in appeal as to whether there was
abdication of jurisdiction or it was exercised illegally or with material irregularity4
Issues are the crux of a civil case; In C V Joshi Vs Elphinstone Spinning Mills, 2001
BomCR 57, the Honble Bombay High Court laid down that even in execution
proceedings issues come into play by way of prudence, though it is not technically
necessary to frame them.
To form a distinct issue, a material proposition must affirmed by one party and denied by
other. Unless each material proposition is affirmed by the plaintiff and denied by the
defendant, a distinct issue will not form.
At this juncture, it is not out of scope to see Rule 1 (3) of Order XIV of C.P.C, which
reads as infra: Each material proposition affirmed by one party and denied by the other
shall form the subject of a distinct issue.
In AIR 2001 Supreme Court 490 the Honble Supreme Court of India held: the stage of
framing issues is an important one in as much as on that day the scope of the trial is
determined by laying the path on which a trial should proceed excluding diversions and
departures therefrom. That the dispute between the parties is determined, aitia forfeited

4 https://articlesonlaw.wordpress.com/2015/10/26/issues-in-civil-cases/

Naroda and the concave mirror held by the Court the reflecting the pleadings of the
parties pinpointed the issues the disputes on which the two sides differ.
The correct decision of civil lis largely depends on the correct framing of issues correctly
determining the real point in controversy which need to be decided. The scheme of Order
14 of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to settlement of issues shows that and issue
arises when a material proposition of fact or law is affirmed by one party and denied by
the other.
Each material proposition and from the one party and denied by the other to form the
subject of a distinct issue. An obligation is cast on the Court to read the plaint/petition and
the written statement/counter if any, and indigenous with assistants of the landed counsel
for the parties committed propositions of fact or law on which the parties are at variance.
Issues should be framed and recorded on with this in the case will depend In Satya
Narayan Vs Radha Mohan reported in A 1979 Raj 126 the Honble Rajasthan High
Court while holding that issues can be framed even beyond the pleadings.
The Supreme Court in its decision reported as Ramesh B.Desai Vs. Bipin Vadilal
Mehta, (2006) 5 SCC 638, (2006) 5 SCC 638, has laid down that Order 14 Rule 2 of
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 confers no jurisdiction on a Court to decide the mixed
questions of fact and law as a preliminary issue. In this ruling, it was held that Sub-rule
(2) of Order XIV Rule 2 CPC lays down that where issues both of law and of fact arise in
the same suit, and the Court is of opinion that the case or any part thereof may be
disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first if that issue relates to (a) the
jurisdiction of the Court, or (b) a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in
force.
In the case of Major S.S Khanna V. Brig. F.J.Dillon, AIR 1964 SC 497, it was observed
as under:- Under O. 14 R. 2 where issues both of law and of fact arise in the same suit,
and the Court is of opinion that the case or any part thereof may be disposed of on the
issues of law only, it shall try those issues first, and for that purpose may, if it thinks fit,
postpone the settlement of the issues of fact until after the issues of law have been
determined. The jurisdiction to try issues of law apart from the issues of fact may be
exercised only where in the opinion of the Court the whole suit may be disposed of on the
issues of law alone, but the Code confers no jurisdiction upon the Court to try a suit on
mixed issues of law and fact as preliminary issues. Normally all the issues in a suit should

be tried by the Court: not to do so, especially when the decision on issues even of law
depends upon the decision of issues of fact, would result in a lop-sided trial of the suit.5
KINDS OF ISSUES:
If defendant makes no defence, framing and recording issue by the Court does not arise.
That too, in such a case, a Court need not frame and record a issue inasmuch as the
defendant makes no defence at the first hearing of the suit. In Desi Kedri vs. Huzurabad
CoOperative Marketing Society Ltd it was held that Issues need not be framed when
there is no dispute with regard to material averments in the plaint.
According to Rule 1(4) of Order XIV of C.P.C, issues are of two kinds.
Issues of fact,
Issues of law.
Of course, there is another aspect of mixed question of fact and law, which would be
discussed later under the heading of preliminary issue6.
GENERAL SUGGESTIONS FOR FRAMING ISSUES:
Issues not to be unnecessarily wide.; Issues to be arranged in logical sequence; Issues on
questions of fact must be generally be put down first; then mixed questions of fact and
law and issues on pure questions of law must come last.
Detect the Broad basic issues that arise in that type/genre of cases before examining
pleadings. Firstly, note the nature and type of case .
Issues must be specific. Loaded issues should not be framed.
Note and frame the issue set for cases of that type. It is more or less a set of directions or
a programme of action in that particular type of cases.
In Appeals, the first and primary issue is as to what is wrong with the Judgment/order,
while in second appeals an issue relating to the substantial question of law has to be
framed which is the primary issue in the matter.
5 www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/framing-of-issues-1180-1.html
6 https://articlesonlaw.wordpress.com/2015/10/26/issues-in-civil-cases/

Now look to and frame the issues on the factual and legal questions pleaded and denied
and/or admitted either fully or partially and pare down the issue to its barest essentials.
To form the basis of an issue there are requirements of the pleadings of the Plaintiff and
requirements of the denials in the pleadings of the Defendant and issues can be framed
only if the tests are satisfied. E.g. In cases of fraud, in res judicata and the like, when the
law of pleadings requires that there have to be specific pleadings, failing which no issues
can be framed on that point.
The first question would be to see what law is applicable in the matter to get the decision
that the plaintiff wants. All possible questions that may arise or may have to be
determined from that particular area of law ought to be before the Court while drafting
the issues.
If looking to the written statement the Court finds that all the points for determination
have not been brought out in defense, the Court has to proceed to pass the judgment or
otherwise proceed as per law.
In cases where the point for determination is partly admitted by the other side, such a
party would only be required to prove only that part of the point for determination
which is not admitted by the other side and not the point in its entirety. In other words, if
the facts that support a point for determination consist of two parts A and B, and the other
side admits either of them, the issue should be narrowed down from the broad basic issue
to only that part that the other side is denying.
The burden of proving something is on the party who asserts the same, unless the other
side would fail is no evidence is given, or unless the best evidence lies in the hands of the
opposite party. After putting the burden of proof on the correct party, one is to see the
interplay of the issues and make the adjustment accordingly.
Note issues relating to limitation, jurisdiction and inherent jurisdiction, when they are
evident on the face of the record, where the Court is obliged to dismiss or reject the
matter if the matter is clearly time barred or beyond jurisdiction of the Court.
Note issues relating to special areas when the Court gets jurisdiction to try a matter in
appeals and second appeals. In appeals the Court gets jurisdiction only if there is a defect

in the judgment or order. In second Appeals the mandatory issue is if the Appellant has
raised a substantial question of law.
When the matter does not disclose a cause of action it is the duty of the Court to dismiss
the same and ensure that it does not occupy the time of the Court.
Vague Pleadings: Where the pleadings are vague and do not fall within the parameters
and the law related to the laws of pleadings in the Code of Civil Procedure, then issues
may not be framed.
Alternate issues:- In some cases issues have to be framed in the alternative, for example
in cases of Specific Relief they may be one set and line of issues relating to the specific
performance of the contract, and in the alternative there may be another line and set of
issues relating to grant of compensation case the relief of specific performance is not
granted.
Final and accurate issues:- Just by way of illustration in the reported in 2009(6) BCR 857
in Siddhi Chunilal Vs. Suresh Gopkishan. (supra) in which Borkar J passed his
Judgment, the required issue stated with accuracy when viewed in this context ought to
have been: Does Plaintiff prove that he is in settled possession of the premises? And not
Does Plaintiff prove that he is in lawful possession of the premises?7
IMPORTANCE OF ISSUE IN SUIT PROCEEDINGS:
The stage of framing issues is an important one in as much as on that day the scope of
the trial is determined by laying the path on which a trial should proceed excluding
diversions and departures there from. That the dispute between the parties is determined,
aitia forfeited Naroda and the concave mirror held by the Court the reflecting the
pleadings of the parties pinpointed the issues the disputes on which the two sides differ.
The correct decision of civil lis largely depends on the correct framing of issues correctly
determining the real point in controversy which need to be decided. The scheme of Order
14 of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to settlement of issues shows that and issue
arises when a material proposition of fact or law is affirmed by one party and denied by
the other.

7 https://articlesonlaw.wordpress.com/2015/10/26/issues-in-civil-cases/

Issues are points of contest between the parties in a suit. In other words issues are those
points raised from the pleadings which se a way for the court for entertaining a case and it
brings the court at the right conclusion of justice. The determination of issues has great
importance in the trial of a case, because it is issues and not the pleadings, which
indicates the appropriate evidence to be given. Pleadings constitutes allegations to oneside or the other, and after determination which of the allegations are material for the
purpose of the trial and which of them are admitted or denied, issues are framed and on
the basis of these issues the parties stand the test of the trial.
The object of settlement of issues is to determine the material points in controversy
between the parties. Issues arises when a material proposition of fact or law affirme by
one party and denied by other party. Issues, whether raised from allegations in the
pleadings or from other materials, should not be inconsistent with pleadings, the court is
bound to frame the proper issues arising from the pleadings.
According to order 14 rule 1, issues arise when a material proposition of fact or law is
affirmed by one party and denied by the other. Material propositions are those
propositions of law or fact which a plaintiff must allege in order to show a right to sue or
a defendant must allege in order to constitute his defence. If the defendant at the first
hearing of the suit makes no defence, then according to order 14 rule 1, nothing in this
rule requires the court to frame and record issues.
Each material proposition and from the one party and denied by the other to form the
subject of a distinct issue. An obligation is cast on the Court to read the plaint/petition and
the written statement/counter if any, and indigenous with assistants of the landed counsel
for the parties committed propositions of fact or law on which the parties are at variance.
Issues should be framed and recorded on with this in the case will depend

Framing of issues is necessitated that no party at trial is put to surprise. It guides the
parties to the suit to adduce proper evidence during trial. For right decision in the matter
framing of appropriate issues is essential. Issues are the crux of the matter. Without
understanding the crux of the matter there is no direction in the preparation of the matter
or in the conduct of the matter. Incorrect and inaccurate framing of issues is possibly the

8 http://documents.jdsupra.com/0b12585b-67c4-4c0d-b39b-709fd60c0bc6.pdf

primary cause of unnecessary delay in disposing of matters before court, apart from
causing unnecessary expense to the clients in terms of time, effort and energy.
Conversely, if issues are framed in the manner required by law, after going through all the
proceedings in the matter including the plaint, written statement and the documents as
envisaged by law, it will cut down a lot of unnecessary wastage of court time. On giving
adequate attention to framing issues correctly, we be able to focus our attention on the
correct line of thought that is required to decide a matter and hopefully it will ultimately
lead to far quicker and more efficient justice.
In Makhan Lal Bangal Vs. Manas Bhunia (AIR 2001 SC 490), the Honble Apex
Court held that Framing of issue is an important stage at which scope of the trial is
determined by laying the path on which the trial shall proceed. The duty of framing
proper issue rests with the judge himself, however the parties and their counsels are
bound to assist the court in process of framing issues9
Issues are the backbone of a suit. The framing of issues, therefore has very important
bearing on the trial and decision of a case. The main reasons are:
(i)It is the issues framed and not the pleadings that guide the parties in the matter of
leading evidence;
(ii)The Court cannot refuse to decide the point on which an issue has been framed and
evidence led by the parties, even if the point involved is not mentioned in the pleadings;
(iii)The court should not frame an issue which does not arise in the pleadings
(iv)Issue must be confined to the material questions of fact or law (facta probanda) and
not in subordinate facts or evidence by which material questions of fact or law are either
proved is disproved (facta probantia);
(v)one issue should cover only one fact or law in dispute between the parties and(vi)if the
case does go on appeal, it must be dealt with by the appellate courton the issues settled for
the trial. Final hearing held in any case without settlement of valid issues will be regarded
asunlawful and

9 http://ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/FRAMING

judgment provided in such cases may be overturned or cancelled.10

CASE ANALYSIS
MAKHAN LAL BANGAL VS. MANAS BHUNIA & ORS. 2001 AIR (SC) 490
FACTS:
Elections for the legislative seat of No.216, Sabang Legislative Assembly Constituency in
the district of Midnapore, West Bengal were held in May, 1996. There were four
candidates in the fray. The appellant secured 60453 votes. The respondent no.1 secured
59628 votes. The other two candidates received 594 and 453 votes respectively. On
12.5.1996 the appellant was declared elected by a margin of 825 votes over his nearest
10 https://www.scribd.com/doc/13143638/Settlement-of-Issues-and-Disposal-of-Suit

rival, the respondent no.1. On 17.6.1996, the respondent no.1 filed an election petition
laying challenge to the election of the appellant and seeking a declaration that the result
of the election was void. A declaration that the respondent no.1 was duly elected was also
sought for. On trial the High Court has allowed the election petition and set aside the
election of the appellant declaring the same to be void. No other direction has been made.
ISSUES:
Whether election of the respondent no.1 being the returned candidate from Sabang
Legislative Assembly Constituency is void? Importance of stage of framing of issues?
JUDGEMENT
Considering all aspects of the matter the bench was of the view that corrupt practice
under Sections 123(2), 123(4) and 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
by the respondent no.1 and/or his agents has been proved in this case. Accordingly it is
declared that the election of the respondent no.1 being the returned candidate from
Sabang Legislative Assembly Constituency is void. Their were several parties in the case
which were not made parties is the case . In view of the bench , the High Court has failed
in discharging its statutory obligation cast by Section 98 and 99 of the the RPA resulting
in vitiating the judgment.11
Further court held thatFraming of issue is an important stage at which scope of the trial
is determined by laying the path on which the trial shall proceed. The duty of framing
proper issue rests with the judge himself, however the parties and their counsels are
bound to assist the court in process of framing issues. the stage of framing issues is an
important one in as much as on that day the scope of the trial is determined by laying the
path on which a trial should proceed excluding diversions and departures therefrom. That
the dispute between the parties is determined, aitia forfeited Naroda and the concave
mirror held by the Court the reflecting the pleadings of the parties pinpointed the issues
the disputes on which the two sides differ.12

11 www.westlaw.com
12 Lawmantra.co.in/case-brief-makhan-lal-bangal-vs-manas-bhunia-

CONCLUSION
Framing of issue is commencing point in trial which ends with judgment. When clarity
appear in understanding the dispute, the inputs such as necessary evidence to prove the
disputed fact and legal position on the disputed fact could very well be analysed in the
process of writing judgment. Therefore for effective judgment writing it is imperative to
frame proper issues.

Framing of issues guides the parties to the suit to adduce proper evidence during trial. For
right decision in the matter framing of appropriate issues is essential. Issues are the crux
of the matter. Without understanding the crux of the matter there is no direction in the
preparation of the matter or in the conduct of the matter. Incorrect and inaccurate framing
of issues is possibly the primary cause of unnecessary delay in disposing of matters
before court, apart from causing unnecessary expense to the clients in terms of time,
effort and energy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
WEBSITES:
WWW. WESTLAW.COM
WWW.INDIANKANOON.COM
WWW. LAWMANTRA.CO

WWW.SCRIBD.COM
ARTICLESONLAW.WORDPRESS.COM
WWW.LEGALSERVICESINDIA.COM
BOOKS:
ANDHRA LAW HOUSE, PRO. DR. REGA SURYA RAO, LECTURES ON CODE
OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATION ACT, 2015