Drafting Written Statement, Summaries of Copyright Law

Download Drafting Written Statement and more Summaries Copyright Law in PDF only on Docsity!

Drafting Written Statement

Dr. Zeba Azmat

Definition:

• Written statement is the defense of the defendant.
• a para wise reply of the plaint, in which the defendant

either denies or admits each and every claim and

allegation , drawn up and filed by the plaintiff against

him in the plaint.

• Order VIII Rule 1A ,1908 0f C.P.C:

Duty of defendant to produce document upon

which relief is claimed or relied upon by him

• “Where the defendant bases his defence upon a document,

in support of his defense or claim, he shall enter such

document in a list, and shall produce it in Court when the

written statement is presented by him…”

• Nothing in this rule shall apply to documents-
  • (a) produced for the cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses, or
  • (b) handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory."

• (Order VIII Rule 2.):-New Facts Must be Specially Pleaded
• Provision of Additional Pleas in the Written Statement, whereby defendant can bring all such facts into the knowledge of the court which are kept hidden by the plaintiff, or which can make the plaint void or voidable

• Rule 4 : denial should not be evasive
  • Denial should be clear and specific without any ambiguity
• Rule 5 : ( 1 ) provides, that every allegation of facts in plaint: (i) if not denied specifically. Or (ii) if not denied by necessary implications or (iii) if not stated to be not admitted in the written statement, shall be presumed (by the court) to be admitted by the defendant Except - It will not be not be applicable to person under disability. (presumption of constructive admission) - Instead of having implied admission of the unanswered fact, the court may require the plaintiff to prove the allegation made in the plaint by sufficient and reliable evidence. (upon discretion and satisfaction of the court)
• ( 2 ) Where the defendant has not filed a pleading, (Written Statement) it shall be lawful for the Court to pronounce judgment on the basis of the facts contained in the plaint, except as against a person under a disability, but the Court may, in its discretion, require any such fact to be proved.

• ( 3 ) In exercising its discretion under the proviso to

sub- rule ( 1 ) or under sub-rule ( 2 ), the Court shall

have due regard to the fact whether the defendant

could have, or has, engaged a pleader.

• ( 4 ) Whenever a judgment is pronounced under this

rule, a decree shall be drawn up in accordance with

such judgment and such decree shall bear the date on

which the judgment was pronounced.

• 7. (Order VIII Rule 7): Defence or set off founded on separate grounds- Where the defendant relies upon several distinct grounds of set off or counter claim founded upon separate and distinct facts, they shall be stated, as far as may be, separately and distinctly.

• Rule 8: New ground of defence (Order VIII Rule 8):
• Any ground of defence which has arisen after the institution of the Suit or the presentation of a written statement, claiming a set off or counter claim, may be raised by the defendant or plaintiff, as the case may be, (in separate application, with due permission of the court)

• Under Order VIII Rule 10 where any party from whom a written statement is required under Rule 1 or Rule 9 fails to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the court, the court shall pronounce judgment against him or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit and on the pronouncement of such judgment a decree shall be drawn up. This rule gives a discretion to the Court either to pronounce the judgment against the defendant or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit.“

• (Balraj Taneja & Another v. Sunil Madan & Another [( 1999 ) 8 SCC 396 ) held …that merely because written statement is not filed, the Court should not proceed to pass judgment blindly and observed: "The court has not to act blindly upon the admission of a fact made by the Plaintiff in his plaint nor should the court proceed to pass judgment blindly merely because a written statement has not been filed by the defendant. It is a matter of the courts satisfaction and, therefore, only on being satisfied that there is no fact which need be proved on account of deemed admission, the court can conveniently pass a judgment against the defendant who has not filed the written statement."

• in case of minor or unsound mind person,
• A B, son of……aged about………r/o……………, a minor, by C D, son of……aged about…………Ocuu………r/o…………his next friend ………………Plaintiff’ versus E F, son of……aged about………r/o…… , a minor, through his guardian GH, son of………aged about……………r/o………….........., appointed by the order of the court (name of the court ) ……………..Defendant’

• e) para-wise reply of the plaint as admitted or denied, so far as the case admits, (denial should be specific and not evasive);
• f) Prayer
• g) additional pleas;
• h) signing and Verification.
• Order VI, Rule 14, CPC 1908 Deals with Signing of Pleading
• Order VI, Rule 15, CPC 1908 Deals with verification of Pleading

The abovementioned Plaintiff humbly submits as under:

1. That the Plaintiff was carrying on business as hotel-keeper and was running a restaurant at Kanpur, for more than four years past, under the name and style of “Paradise Hotel and Restaurant”.
2. That the building in which the said business was being carried on by the Plaintiff belonged to the Defendant under whom the Plaintiff was a tenant at Rs. 5000 per mensem.
3. That all the goods, like, crockery, utensils, almirah, refrigerator, furniture, etc. used for running the said business belonged to the Plaintiff and not to the defendant.

4. That in order to injure the Plaintiff, and to extort more rent from the Plaintiff, the Defendant started misbehaving with the plaintiff.
5. That inspite of the protests of the Plaintiff, the Defendant forcefully dispossessed the Plaintiff from the said premises and seized Plaintiff’s abovementioned goods.
6. That on account of the wrongful seizure of Plaintiff’s goods in the circumstances mentioned above, the Plaintiff has suffered a pecuniary loss of Rs. 500000 /- which the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff but the Defendant has refused to pay the same.
7. That the cause of action arose on 05. 09. 2017 (Fifth day of September 2017 ), when the goods of the Plaintiff were seized by the Defendant, at the note of its execution at Kanpur, hence the court has jurisdiction.
8. That the value of the suit for the purpose of court-fee and jurisdiction is Rs. 500000 /-, hence the court has jurisdiction.