Section 75 in Standing Order No. 2 Of The Financial Commissioner Himachal Pradesh
75. Adjournments on payment of costs.
- It has been observed that a number of Courts grant an adjournment merely because the party at fault is prepared to pay the cost of adjournment. Subordinate Courts should bear in mind that the offer of payment of the costs of adjournment is not in itself a sufficient ground for adjournment. The provisions of Order XVII, rule 3, also deserve notice in this connection. If a party to a suit whom time has been granted for a specific purpose as contemplated by Order XVII, rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, fails to perform the act or acts for which time was granted with any good cause, the rules gives the court the discretion to proceed to decide the suit 'forthwith', i.e., without granting any adjournment. In such cases a further adjournment should not ordinarily be granted, merely because offer is made for payment of costs. In some courts, it is apparently assumed that if such an adjournment is not granted the case will be remanded by an Appellate Court. There are however, no valid grounds for this assumption. If the record makes it clear that a further adjournment has been refused because of negligence of the party concerned, such refusal would not in itself justify an Appellate Court in remanding the case. An adjournment granted otherwise than on full and sufficient grounds is a favour and in suits favour can be shown to one party only at the expense of the other.No hard and fast rule can, however, be laid down. Each case must be judged on its own merits.
