Hearing of suit

A Project submitted in partial fulfilment of the course Code of civil

Procedure, 5th SEMESTER during the Academic Year 2018-2019

SUBMITTED BY:
Anupam Pandey
Roll No. - 1612
B.B.A LL.B

SUBMITTED TO:
Ms Meeta mohini
FACULTY OF CPC

AUGUST, 2018
CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAYAYA NAGAR,
MEETHAPUR, PATNA-800001
 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The Aims and Objectives of this project are:

1. To analyse the concept of suit
2. To analyse the method of hearing of suit under Code of civil procedure

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For this study, doctrinal research method was utilised. Various articles, e-articles, reports and
books from library were used extensively in framing all the data and figures in appropriate
form, essential for this study.
The method used in writing this research is primarily analytical.
 INTRODUCTION
A lawsuit (or suit in law) is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil
court of law.
Sometimes, the term "lawsuit" is in reference to a civil action brought in a court of law in
which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions,
demands a legal or equitable remedy. The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's
complaint. If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is in the plaintiff's favor, and a variety of
court orders may be issued to enforce a right, award damages, or impose a temporary or
permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be
issued to prevent future legal disputes.
The process of instituting a suit includes the filing of a plaint by a plaintiff to claim relief
against the wrongdoing or breach of trust or contract along with relevant documents within
period of limitation prescribed under limitation act. When the court considers and is satisfied
with the plain, it issues summons notice to defendant. When defendant does not appear then
an ex-partee decree can be passed by the judge. When the defendant does appear in the court,
he has to file the written statement along with all the documents within 30 to 90 days.
Admission and denial is filed by both the parties in response to opposite parties claim. First
hearing takes place after the written statement is filed and issues are framed under order 16.
Then there takes hearing of suit where the various issues which are framed are contended and
adjudged upon and finally after hearing of the suit the judgement is passed and eventually
decree is framed.
 SUIT
Suit-The expression "suit" is not defined in the Code. But in Hansraj Gupta v. Official
Liquidators of The Dehra Dun-Mussoorie electric Tramway Co. Ltd.10, Their Lordships of
the Privy Council have defined the term in the following words, "The word suit' ordinarily
means and apart from some context must be taken to mean, a civil proceeding instituted by
the presentation of a plaint" (emphasis supplied) Thus, every is instituted by the presentation
of the plaint. It means when there is no suit there is no decree. Thus rejection of an
application for leave to sue in forma pauperis is not a decree, as there is no plaint till the
application is granted.
According to Chamber’s 20th Century Dictionary (1983), it is a generic term of
comprehensive signification referring to any proceeding by one person or persons against
another or others in a court of law wherein the plaintiff pursues the remedy which the law
affords him for the redress of any injury or enforcement of a right, whether at law or in
equity. In the Black’s Law Dictionary (7th Edition) this term is defined as the proceeding
initiated by a party or parties against another in the court of law. According to some other
views, ‘suit’ includes appellate proceeding also; but it does not include an execution
proceeding. Ordinarily, suit under the CPC is a civil proceeding instituted by the presentation
of a plaint.
It may, however, be noted that under certain enactments specific provisions have been made
to treat applications as suits, e.g. proceedings under the Indian Succession Act, the Hindu
Marriage Act, the Land Acquisition Act, the Arbitration Act, etc. They are statutory suits and
the decisions given thereunder are, therefore, decrees. Therefore, a proceeding which does
not commence with a plaint and which is not treated as a suit under any other Act, cannot be
said to be a "suit" under the Code also and the decision given therein cannot be said to be a
"decree" under Section 2(2) of the Code. Thus, a decision of a tribunal, even though
described as "decree" ander the Act, is a decree passed by a tribunal and not by a court
covered by Section 2(2).11
There are four essentials of a suit1
a) Opposing parties
b) Subject matter in dispute
c) Cause of action; and
d) Relief

1
Krishnappa bin. Shivappa bin ILR (1907) 31Bom 393 at p. 398
 First hearing
After the presentation of plaint by the plaintiff and filing of written statement by the
defendant, there arrives a stage called first hearing. Order 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 deals with the first hearing. The word first hearing as such is no where defined in the
Code, but the literal meaning of the term is the day on which the court goes into the pleadings
of parties in order to understand their contentions. While Order 10 of the Code enjoins the
court to examine parties with a view to ascertain matters in controversy in the suit. It has been
held by the Supreme Court that First hearing is the day on which the court applies its mind to
the case either for framing issues or for taking evidence2
The Order X Rule 1 provides that the court shall, at the first hearing of the suit, ascertain
from each party or his pleader whether he admits or denies such allegations or facts as are
made in the plaint or in the written statement, if any, of the opposite party. After recording
admissions and denials, the court shall direct the parties to the suit to settle out of court
through conciliation, arbitration, mediation or Lok Adalat. If there is no settlement, the case
will again be referred to the court. Rule 2 further provides that for oral examination of parties
to the suit with a view to elucidating matters in controversy in the suit. The court, thus,
ascertain with precision the propositions of law or fact on which the parties are at variance
and on such questions issues are required to be framed. The main purpose behind these rules
is to understand and inform the parties about their real dispute so that the area of conflict can
be dealt with between the parties at the same time, later on if any party come to realise about
these issues, it would not be surprise to them.

Therefore, on the first hearing, the main task of framing of issues is done. Issue means a point
in question or some important subject of discussion. Issues are points of contradictory
averments made by the parties and decide by the court. When one fact is asserted by the party
and the same is denied by other, that is oppositions, such per se facts, which will be called
material propositions will constitute issues. Order X Rule 1(2) and 1(3) provides that 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. Each
material proposition affirmed by one party and denied by the other shall form the subject-
matter of a distinct issue.

2
Arjun Khaimal Makhijani v. Jamnadas C. Tuliani (1989) 4 SCC 612
Basically the framing of issues requires some conditions and material which is inclusive of
mainly three things. Firstly, the allegations made on oath by the parties, or by any persons
present on their behalf, or statements made by the pleaders appearing for the parties.
Secondly, the allegations made in pleading or in answers to interrogatories and thirdly,
documents produced by the parties.3 Therefore their important has been realised appropriately
in leading judgement in State of Gujarat v. Jaipalsingh Jaswantsingh Engineers and
Contractors 4 wherein it was stated that “such framing of issues in the first instance would
facilitate the applicant to lead necessary evidence in support of the claim and the reliefs
prayed pursuant thereto. In the second instance, it will avail the opponent an opportunity to
confront and contradict the particular witness and thereafter to lead the evidence if he so
desires to bring home the defence pleaded, and in the third instance, enlighten the trail court
to test and appreciate the same in proper perspective to enable it to reach a just decision. It is
hardly required to be told that issues are backbone of a suit. They are also the lamp-post
which enlightens the parties to the proceedings, the trial court and even the appellate court- as
to what is the controversy, what is evidence and where the way to truth and justice lies.”
Therefore the framing of issues is the duty of the court since only the court can frame the
issues in a suit. They are decided by the Presiding Officer of the court that is the Judge. At
the same time, parties and their pleaders thereof must also assist the court in framing the
issues wherever required. While issues are supposed to be clear and specific, vague and
evasive issues creates irregularities in the administration of justice. Order X also provides that
the court may examine witnesses or inspect documents before framing issues, to amend the
issues or to frame additional issues or to strike out issues that may appear to the court to be
wrongly framed.

But in circumstances wherein there is the omission of court to framing of issues, such is not
considered fatal to the suit. But in case, such omissions leads to affect the disposal of suits on
merits then the case must be remanded to the trail court for fresh trial. While on the other
hand, it was held that where the parties knew that certain point of proposition would have
been an issue and yet its disposition would not be fatal to the suit, such omission of court on
framing issue is acceptable provided it has caused no prejudice or substantial injustice.5 Order
15 deals with various situations where a suit can be disposed off on the first hearing itself.

3
Rule 1(5) and 3
4
(1994) 35 (1) Guj LR 258
5
Keval Krishan v. Dina Nath (1992) 2 SCC 51
Therefore, issues are extremely important for a proper proceeding of a suit and right decision
of the case 6and omission thereto can be caused, bearing valid reasons and while if framed
properly, all issue must be normally decided at one and same time.7

6
Pandurang Laxman v. Kaluram Bahiru AIR 1956 Bom 254
7
Lufthansa General Airlines v Vij sales Corporation (1998) 8 SCC 623
 EX-PARTE HEARING
An ex parte decree is a decree passed in the absence of the defendant (in absenti). Where the
plaintiff appears and the defendant does not appear when the suit is called out for hearing and
if the defendant is duly served, the court may hear the suit ex-parte and pass a decree against
him. Such a decree is neither null and void nor inoperative but is merely voidable and unless
and until it is annulled on legal and valid grounds, it is proper, lawful, operative and
enforceable like a bi-parte decree and it has all the force of a valid decree.(Ram Gobinda V.
Bhaktabala, AIR 1971 SC 664).

The defendant, against whom an ex-parte decree has been passed, has the following remedies
available to him:

1. to apply to the court by which such decree is passed to set it aside: Order IX, Rule 13
;or
2. to prefer an appeal against such decree: Section 96(2) (or to file a revision under
Section 115 where no appeal lies);
3. to apply for review:Order 47 Rule 1;or
4. to file a suit on the ground of fraud.

The above remedies are concurrent and they can be prosecuted simultaneously or
concurrently.[Mahesh Yadav V. Rajeshwar Singh,(2009) 2 SCC 205]

(1)Setting aside ex parte decree: Rule 13 :

(i)Who may apply?

The defendant against whom ex-parte decree has been passed may apply for setting it aside.
Where there are two or more defendants, any one or more of them may also make such
application. The expression “defendant” is wide enough to include a person who is adversely
affected by the decree. A purchaser of mortgaged property, hence,may make an application
under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code.(Santosh Chopra V. Teja Singh,AIR 1977 Del). But a
defendant against whom the suit has been dismissed cannot be said to be “aggrieved” by the
decree and cannot apply under this rule.
(ii)Where application lies?

An application for setting aside ex-parte decree may be made to the court which passed the
decree. Where such decree is confirmed, reversed or modified by a superior court, an
application may be filed in a superior court.

(iii)Grounds:

This rule requires an application by the defendant to set aside an ex-parte decree passed
against him if there exist sufficient grounds for it. If the defendant satisfies the court that (i)
the summons was not duly served; or (ii) he was prevented by any sufficient cause from
appearing when the suit was called out for hearing, the court will set aside the decree passed
against him and appoint a day for proceeding with the suit.

(iv)Summons not duly served:

As provided in Rule 6, the suit may proceed ex-parte against the defendant only when it is
proved by the plaintiff to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant did not appear even
though the summons was duly served. In that case, an ex-parte decree may be passed against
him. Therefore, if the defendant satisfies the court that the summons was not duly served
upon him, the court must set aside the ex parte decree passed against him,

(v)Sufficient cause:

The expression “sufficient cause” has not been defined anywhere in the code. It is a question
to be determined in the facts and circumstances of each case.The words “sufficient cause”
must be liberally construed to enable the court to exercise powers ex debito justitiate. A party
should not be deprived of hearing unless there has been something equivalent to misconduct
or gross negligence on his part.

(vi)Test:

The test which should be applied is whether the defendant honestly and sincerely intended to
remain present when the suit was called on for hearing and did his best to do so. If the reply
is in the affirmative, ex parte decree should be set aside but if it is in the negative, ex parte
decree cannot be recalled.

(vii) Irregularity in service of summons:

The second proviso, as added by the Amendment Act of 1976, however, lays down that the
court shall not set aside an ex parte decree merely on the ground of irregularity in service of
summons in a case where the defendant had adequate notice of the date of hearing of the suit,
and had sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiff's claim. The code thus makes
distinction between illegality and irregularity. The former goes to the root of the matter and
renders the action null and void. The latter, however, does not invalidate the action, unless
prejudice has been caused to the person making a complaint. The word “and” in the second
proviso to Rule 13 must be read as conjunctive and not disjunctive. Hence, unless both the
conditions are satisfied, an ex parte decree cannot be set aside.

(vii)Limitation:

An application for setting aside ex-parte decree can be made within thirty days from the date
of the decree.

(viii)Notice to opposite party:

An ex-parte decree can not be set aside without issuing notice to the opposite party and
without giving him an opportunity of hearing. This is in consonance with the principles of
natural justice and fair play.

(ix) Procedure:

An application under Rule 13 for setting aside ex-parte decree may be made by the defendant.
In case of death of defendant, his legal representatives can also make such application. It
should be signed and verified by the party and not by his advocate.6

(x) ' Upon such terms and conditions as the court thinks fit':

The court has a very wide discretion in imposing such terms and conditions on the defendant
as it thinks fit before setting aside the ex-parte decree.(V.K.Industries V.M.P.Electricity
Board,AIR2002SC159). It may order the payment of costs, or may order the defendant even
to deposit the decretal amount in the court in an appropriate case. The discretion, whoever,
must be exercised reasonably and judicially and not arbitrarily or capriciously. If the terms
are onerous, or otherwise unreasonable, a superior court can interfere with them. When an ex
parte decree is set aside on certain condition and those condensations are not complied with
within the time granted by the court, the application stands dismissed.

(xi) Res judicata:

Where an application for setting aside an ex parte decree is dismissed, no fresh application
would lie if such dismissal is on merits and rule of res judicata will apply. But if the dismissal
is for default of the appearance or circumstances have been changed, a second application
would be maintainable.(Prahalad Singh V.Sukhdev Singh,AIR1987 SC 1145).

(xii) Successive applications:

Successive applications are maintainable only if circumstances have changed, not otherwise.

(xiii) Extent of setting aside ex parte decree:

A peculiar situation, however, arises where an ex parte decree is passed against all the
defendants but summonses are not served to all of them; or an application to set it aside is
made by some of them; or where against some of the defendants a decree is passed on merits
after hearing them but against some of the defendants it is passed ex parte and an application
to set it aside is made by one or more of the defendants against whom a decree is passed ex
partę. As a general rule the court will set aside the decree only against such defendant or
defendants who had made an application. (Rupchand Gupta V. Raghuvanshi Pvt. Ltd, AIR
1964 SC 1889).

Illustration :

In a suit by A against B, C and D, ex parte decree was passed. C and D were not served with
summonses while B was served. In an application by C and D, it was held that the decree
against B cannot set aside. (xv) Effect of setting aside ex parte decree:

The effect of setting aside an ex parte decree is that the suit is restored, and the court should
proceed to decide the suit as it stood before the decree. The trial should commence de novo
and the evidence that had been recorded in the ex parte proceedings should not be taken into
account.(Ganesh Prasad V. Lakshmi Narayan, AIR 1985 SC 964). (xvi) Hearing of
application pending appeal:

Mere filing of an appeal in an appellate court against an ex parte decree does not take away
the jurisdiction of the trial court to entertain and decide an application for setting aside an ex
parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13. As already stated earlier , two proceedings are different ,
distinct and independent and there is no possibility of conflict of decision.

(2) Appeal:

An appeal lies against an order rejecting an application to set aside ex parte decree. As stated
above , an ex parte decree is a decree under Section2(2) of the Code and, therefore , an
aggrieved party can also file an appeal under Section 96(2) of the Code. A controversial and
some what complicated question of law is: Whether in su ch cases , the appellate court can
only consider the decree passed by the lower court on merits as to whether there were
sufficient grounds to pass the decree or whether the appellate court can also consider whether
there were sufficient reasons for the defendant for non-appearance and the court was not
justified in passing an ex parte decree against the defendant.

There is a conflict of judicial decisions on this point. One view is that the appellate court can
consider only the question whether the decree was wrong in law while the other view is that
the appellate court has power to consider whether the lower court was justified in proceeding
with the matter ex parte and, if the lower court was not right in doing so, to set aside the ex
parte decree. It is submitted that the latter view appears to be much more acceptable and
preferable particularly when appeal is continuation of suit and rehearing of the matter.

(3) Revision:

An order setting aside an ex parte decree is a “case decided” within the meaning of Section
115 of the Code and is , therefore , revisable . A High court may also exercise supervisory
jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution in appropriate cases.(Kamta Prasad
V.Jaggiya, AIR 1999 All 184).

(4) Review:

Since all the remedies against an ex parte decree are concurrent , an aggrieved party can also
file an application for review if the conditions laid down in Order 47 Rule 1 are satisfied. (5)
Suit:

A suit to set aside an ex parte decree is not maintainable. But if an ex parte decree is alleged
to have been obtained by the plaintiff by fraud, the defendant can file a regular suit to set
aside such decree. It is a settled law that fraud vitiates the most solemn transactions.(Bhanu
Kumar Jain V. Archana Kumar, AIR 2005SC 626). In such suitş the onus is on the part who
alleges that the ex parte decree passed against him was fraudulent.
 Trial in open court
As a general rule, the evidence of witnesses shall be taken orally in open court in the
presence and under the personal direction and superintendence f the judge.42 It is well-settled
that, in general, all cases brought before the courts, whether civil, criminal or others, must be
heard in open court.
Public trial in open court is undoubtedly essential for the healthy, objective and fair
administration of justice. Trial held subject to public scrutiny and gaze naturally acts as a
check against judicial caprice or vagaries, and serves as a powerful instrument for creating
confidence of the public in the fairness, objectivity and impartiality of the administration of
justice.
Public confidence in the administration of justice is of such great significance that there can
be no two opinions on the broad proposition that in discharging their functions as judicial
tribunals, courts must generally hear causes in the open and must permit public admission to
the courtroom.
As Bentham8 has observed:
"In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest and evil in every shape have full swing. Only in
proportion as publicity has place can any of the checks applicable to judicial injustice
operate. Where there is no publicity, there is no justice Publicity is the very soul of justice. It
is the keenest spur to exertion, and surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge
himself while trying under trial in the sense that the security of securities is publicity."

8
Scott v scott, 1913, AC 417 (HL)
 Trial in camera
A case may, however, occur where the requirement of the administration of justice itself may
make it necessary for the court to hold a trial in camera. If the primary function of the court is
to do justice in causes before then on principle, it is difficult to accede to the proposition that
there be no exception to the rule that all causes must be tried in open court. If the principle
that all trials before courts must be held in public was treated as inflexible and universal, and
it is held that it admits of no exceptions whatever, cases may arise where, by following the
principle, justice itself may be defeated.
The overriding consideration which must determine the conduct of proceedings before a court
is fair administration of justice. Indeed, the principle that all cases must be tried in public is
really and ultimately based on the view that it is such public trial of cases that assists the fair
and impartial administration of justice. The administration of justice is thus the primary
object of the work done in courts; and so, if there is a conflict between the claims of the
administration of justice itself and those of public trial, public trial must yield to the
administration of justice.
 Right to begin and reply
The right to begin follows from the rules of evidence. Sections 101 to 114 of the evidence
act, 1872 deal with burden of proof. Section 102 of the Act provides that the urden of proof
lies on that party who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side. Accordingly,
as a general rule, the plaintiff has to prove his claim and, therefore, he has right to begin
unless the defendant admits the facts alleged by the plaintiff and contends that either on point
of law (e.g. res judicata, limitation, etc.) or on some additional facts alleged by him, the
plaintiff is not entitled to any relief. In that case, the defendant has right to begin.46
The party having the right to begin shall state his case and produce is evidence in support of
the issues which he is bound to prove. The other party shall then state his case and produce
his evidence, if any, and may the court generally on the whole case. The party beginning may
reply generally on the whole case. Where there are several issues, the burden of proving
some of which lies on the other party, the party beginning may, at his option, either produce
his evidence generally on those issues or reserve it by way of answer to the evidence
produced by the other party49 But if the plaintiff's counsel is absent at the time of hearing or
arrives late, and in the meantime the counsel for the defendant starts his arguments, the
counsel for the plaintiff has no right of interruption.9 Where a party wishes to be examined as
a witness, he should first subject himself for examination before other witnesses are
examined.
 Recording of evidence
Radical changes have been made by the Code of Civil Procedure Amendment) Act, 2002 in
relation to recording of oral evidence of witnesses. Before the amendment, such evidence
could be recorded "in open court in the presence and under the personal direction and
superintendence of the judge A lot of time of the court was consumed in that process which
was the main cause of delay in disposal of cases. Under the new provision, oral evidence can
now be recorded by the Court Commissioner. The Court Commissioner may also record
remarks respecting demeanour of witnesses. The report of the Commissioner shall be
submitted to the court which shall form part of the record of the suit.
a. Appealable cases
In appealable cases, the evidence of each witness shall be taken down
the judge in the language of the court or in English if pleaders read over to the witness,
interpreted to him and signed by the judge. The court may (a) for any special reason, take
down any particular question and answer, or any objection to any question; (b) record such
remarks as it thinks material respecting the demeanour of any witness; (c) recall any witness
at any stage of the suit who has been examined and put such questions as it thinks fit;
(d) permit any party to the suit to produce the evidence which was not within his knowledge
or could not be produced by him despite due diligence; or (e) make local inspection and make
a memorandum of any relevant facts observed at such inspection

b. Non appealable cases

In non appealable cases ,the judge shall make or dictate directly on a typewriter or cause to
be mechanically recorded, a memorandum of the substance of the desposition of witnesses.

c. Examination de bene esse

Generally witnesses are examined at the hearing of the suit. Rule 16, however, provides for
examination of a witness before the hearing, when he is about to leave the jurisdiction of the
court or other sufficient cause is shown to the satisfaction of the court why his evidence
should be taken immediately. This is called de bene esse examination and it is permitted to do
justice between the parties. A witness may be examined on commission in certain
circumstances.
d. Evidence recorded by another judge: Rule 15
Where a judge is prevented by death, transfer or other cause from conducting the trial of a
 suit, his successor may deal with the evidence recorded by him and proceed with the suit
from the stage at which it was left.
It has been held by the Supreme Court that the principle that "one
who hears must decide" applicable to quasi-judicial authorities does not apply to suits.
“Hearing of suit” as understood under Code of civil procedure is not confined to oral hearing.
It begins when evidence in the suit begins and is concluded by pronouncement of judgment.
Code of Civil Procedure contemplates that at various stages of hearing of the suit, a judge
may be transferred or may not be able to conclude the trial. In such a situation, a successor
judge may proceed with the suit from the stage his predecessor left.
e. Oral arguments
A court may permit a party or his pleader to argue a case orally. For such oral arguments, it is
open to the court to fix time limits, as it thinks fit.
f. Written arguments
A court may allow a party or his pleader to submit written arguments in support of his case.
Such written arguments shall form part of the record. A copy of such written arguments
should be supplied to the other side. Normally, no adjournment should be granted for
submitting written arguments.
 CONCLUSION

A lawsuit (or suit in law) is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil
court of law.
Sometimes, the term "lawsuit" is in reference to a civil action brought in a court of law in
which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions,
demands a legal or equitable remedy. The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's
complaint. If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is in the plaintiff's favor, and a variety of
court orders may be issued to enforce a right, award damages, or impose a temporary or
permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be
issued to prevent future legal disputes.
The process of instituting a suit includes the filing of a plaint by a plaintiff to claim relief
against the wrongdoing or breach of trust or contract along with relevant documents within
period of limitation prescribed under limitation act. When the court considers and is satisfied
with the plain, it issues summons notice to defendant. When defendant does not appear then
an ex-partee decree can be passed by the judge. When the defendant does appear in the court,
he has to file the written statement along with all the documents within 30 to 90 days.
Admission and denial is filed by both the parties in response to opoosite parties claim. First
hearing takes place after the written statement is filed and issues are framed under order 16.
Then there takes hearing of suit where the various issues which are framed are contended and
adjudged upon and finally after hearing of the suit the judgement is passed and eventually
decree is framed. Hearing of the suit is dealt in the order 18 of the code.
Hearing can take place in an open court or there can be in camera proceedings where only the
parties concerned are to be present before the court and no one else.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

1. Black’s law dictionary,2nd edition

2. CK TAKWANI, CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1963, 8th edition
3. MULLA, THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 17th edition
4. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

WEBSITES

1. https://www.legalbites.in/first-hearing/
2. http://lawtimesjournal.in/first-hearing/