AMENDMENT TO CPC

INSTITUTION OF SUITS
 The Amendment Act of 1999 has inserted a new
sub-section to section 26, whereby it has become
mandatory that all the facts mentioned in the
plaint are proved by way of an affidavit.
Therefore, at the time of institution of a suit, now
the plaint will have to be accompanied by an
affidavit.
SUMMONS TO DEFENDANTS

Section 27 of the Code provides for the issue of
summons to the defendants in a suit to appear
and answer the claim in the suit. Earlier, the
section did not provide any time limit for the
plaintiff to serve the summons on the defendants.
That resulted in the suits instituted decades ago
being still at the preliminary stage because the
plaintiffs failed to serve summons on the
defendants. The Amendment Act of 1999, has
plugged this loophole by providing that the
defendants must be served with summons within
30 days of institution of the suit.
ISSUE AND SERVICE OF SUMMONS
 The amendments made to Order V have brought
in some sweeping changes to ensure a speedy
trial. According to the new provisions of Order V:
a) The Defendant is required to file his Written
Statement within 30 days of being served with
the summons; b) The Court may extend the said
period of 30 days to 90 days and not thereafter,
for reasons to be recorded in writing; c) It is now
mandatory for every summons to be accompanied
by a copy of the plaint; d
 ) One of the most important changes brought in by
the recent amendments is the change in the mode of
delivery of summons by the Court. Earlier, the
summons had to be delivered only through the proper
officer of the Court and no one else. However, the
Amendment Act of 2002 has now laid down that
summons may be delivered either through a proper
officer of the court or through such courier services as
are approved by the Court. Further, the delivery of
summons can also be made by way of registered post,
speed post or courier services as approved by the
Court, at the expense of the Plaintiff. In addition, the
Court may also permit on an application of the
Plaintiff, for the Plaintiff himself to effect service of
summons.
PLEADINGS IN GENERAL
 A new provision has been inserted in Order VI
whereby, a person verifying the pleadings has
also to furnish an affidavit in support of his
pleadings. Moreover, now no application for
amendment will be allowed once the trial has
commenced, except when the Court concludes
that the party could not have raised the matter
before the commencement of the trial.
FILING OF DEFENDANTS WRITTEN
STATEMENT

 The defendant has to submit the written

statement within 30 days of the service of
summons. This may be extended upon an
application to the court, up to a maximum of 90
days Reasons for granting extension to be
recorded in writing (as per amended Rule 1 sub
rule (i), Schedule I of Order V,).
NUMBER OF ADJOURNMENTS
CURTAILED
 The newly inserted provisions now provide that a
Court may grant adjournments from time to
time. However, the catch is that adjournments
can only be granted on the basis of a written
application. Besides, the Court should not grant
more than three adjournments to a party to the
suit.
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
 The Amendment Act of 2002 has made provisions
for submission of written arguments in support of
one’s case. Earlier, there was no such provision in
the Code and it provided only for oral arguments.
Now any party to the suit, in addition to oral
arguments, can make written arguments as well
and it has to be done with the permission of the
Court. This measure should help in saving the
valuable time of the Court.
RECORDING OF EVIDENCE:
 Another very important change in the Code is in
respect of the procedure of recording of evidence,
this will have wide reaching implications.
According to the new rule, recording of evidence
has to be conducted in the following manner:
 a) Examination in Chief of a witness shall be on
affidavit; b) The Cross Examination and Re-
Examination of such a witness will be either
taken by the Court or the Commissioner
appointed by it;
 c) The Court or the Commissioner will then
record the evidence in writing or mechanically in
the presence of the Judge or the Commissioner,
as the case may be;
RECORDING OF EVIDENCE:
 d) The Commissioner has to return the evidence
along with his report in writing to the concerned
Court; e) The report of the Commissioner has to
be submitted to the concerned Court within 60
days of such appointment or within such further
extended time as the Court may permit for
reasons to be recorded in writing; f) Such
evidence shall form part of the record of the suit.
 No Further Appeal/No Second Appeal
The scope of section 100A has been widened so far as
restriction on right of further appeal is concerned.
According to the amended provision, now appeal
arising out of an original order / decree, which is
heard and decided by a single Judge, is also covered
by this restriction.
 Similarly, section 102 has also been amended so as to
widen the scope of the section. Hence, no second
appeal will lie from any decree where the subject
matter in the original suit was for recovery of money
upto Rs. 25,000. The earlier limit was Rs 3,000 and it
was restricted to suits of which cognizance could be
taken in Courts of Small Causes.
REVISION OF LOWER COURTS ORDER

 Section 115 has been amended to the

disadvantage of litigants. Under the amended
provision, when a party files a Civil Revision
Petition aggrieved by the Order of a lower Court,
the High Court cannot reverse such Order except
where the Order, if it had been made in favour of
the Revisioner, would have had the effect of
finally disposing of the proceedings. For example,
if a Plaintiff in a suit wishes to make an
amendment to the Plaint and the Trial Court
rejects the application, the High Court cannot
reverse this order, as it would not have finally
disposed of the case if the Order had been in
favour of the Plaintiff
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT AND
DECREE/ORDER

 Judgement to be ordinarily pronounced within 30

days subject to a maximum time limit of 60 days ( for
extraordinary reasons) But this is also not
absolute….( per amended Order XX)
 In cases where the court orders sale of the defendants
property in pursuance of the claim awarded to the
plaintiffs. As per the amendment, the defendant now
has 60 days (as opposed to the earlier 30 days) for
depositing the suit money in court. The amendment
removes the anomaly between the Code and the
limitation act, which granted 60 days to the
defendant before making the sale absolute. The
amendment is particularly beneficial for poorer
litigants who now have additional time to come up
with the funds.
HEARINGS IN COURT

 Once the hearing is commenced both the plaintiff

and defendant shall not be given leave by the
court to amend the suit unless the court is
decides that in spite of due diligence being
exercised the party could not have raised the
matter. Rule 17 of Order VI Further if the party
does not amend the suit within the given time
then she shall not be allowed to unless the court
extends the time. Rule 18 Of Order Vi
 The Act of 2002 has reintroduced the power of
the Court to amend /strike out issues for the
purpose of determining the matter in controversy
between the parties. (Rule V of Order XIV). This
power was taken away by the 1999 amendment.
SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
OUTSIDE OF COURT
 The Act of 1999, has introduced a new provision (S.89)
where the court may by itself, proactively refer a dispute
for alternative dispute resolution methods if it appears that
elements of a settlement exist, which may be acceptable to
the parties to the dispute.
 This is one of the most radical changes introduced in the
Code. There was no such provision earlier. According to a
newly introduced section 89, the Courts have been given
the power to refer the disputes to:
a) Arbitration;
b) Conciliation;
c) Judicial settlement including settlement through Lok
Adalat;
d) Mediation.
 The Court will endeavour in case of such disputes to
formulate the terms of settlement between the parties and
will also effect a compromise as per the prescribed
procedure.