Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 362 (RAJ)

Moolchand v. Shankar Dass

1998-03-11

P.C.JAIN

body1998
JUDGMENT 1. - This is a plaintiff's revision filed under section 115 CPC from the order dated 7.3.1995 of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 6, Jodhpur, whereby the application of the petitioner filed u/O. 10 R. 1 r/w O.18 Rr. 1, 2, 12L, 2-A & Section 151 CPC was dismissed. 2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for recovery of his remuneration against the non-petitioner-defendant. In the application filed by him, as aforesaid, the petitioner/ averred that his application moved u/O. 12-L R. 2-A r/w Section 151 CPC on 25.11.1993 was pending and it was necessary that the defendant be summoned in the Court in order to obtain admissions and denials in respect of his pleadings as also in respect of the documents produced in the Court. 3. By the impugned order, the learned Additional Civil Judge dismissed the above application by observing that the admissions and denials in the pleadings as well as in the documents were made by the parties before framing of the issues. He, therefore, dismissed the above application. 4. I have heard the learned petitioner and the learned counsel for the non-petitioner. 5. The petitioner has submitted that it was necessary to have summoned the defendant in the Court in order to see elucidation on certain ambiguities that crept in the pleadings. The learned Additional Civil Judge did not pay any attention to the applications repeatedly moved by the petitioner. He submitted that the learned Additional Civil Judge has committed serious irregularity in the exercise of his jurisdiction. 6. The learned counsel for the non-petitioner has supported the above order. 7. Order 10 Rule 1 CPC prescribes the proper way of clearing up the pleadings at the first hearing. The oral examination should be carefully carried out and admissions and denials as are not contained in the pleadings must be recorded. In the instant case, as per the impugned order, the learned Additional Civil Judge has categorically stated that admissions and denials of the parties were obtained on the documents filed in the Court. Regarding the admissions and denials affect of the pleadings, the same are also contained in the pleadings themselves. I am satisfied that the learned Additional Civil Judge has not committed any jurisdictional error in dismissing the above application.There is no force in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed.Revision Dismissed. *******