Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.57 seconds)Bimal Chand Jain vs Sri Gopal Agarwal on 27 July, 1981
7. The Apex Court in the case of Bimal Chand Jain v. Gopal Agrawal, 1981 ARC 463, held that the provisions of Order XV, Rule 5, C.P.C. are discretionary and the Courts have power not to strike off defence even in the absence of a representation by tenant, if on the facts and circumstances already existing on record it finds good reasons for doing so. It was further held that it must be remembered that an Order under sub-rule (1) striking off the defence is in the nature of a penalty and a serious responsibility rests on the Court in the matter and the power is not to be exercised mechanically. It was observed that there is a reserve of discretion vested in the Court entitling it not to strike off the defence if it finds good reasons for the same and that the provisions of Order XV, Rule 5 did not oblige the Court to strike off the defence in every case of default.
Section 20 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 30 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
1