The case titled 2023 CLC 1131 addresses the requirements under Article 159 of the Limitation Act, 1908, and the procedural necessities under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for summary suits. The primary issue in this case revolves around the service of summons and the delivery of the plaint and its annexures to the defendant.
Key Points from the Judgment:
1. Limitation Period for Leave to Defend:
- Under Article 159 of the Limitation Act, 1908, the limitation period for filing an application for leave to appear and defend in a summary suit is ten days, starting from the date of service of summons.
2. Service of Summons:
- The appellant/defendant in this case was served through a newspaper publication instead of the standard method of serving summons.
- Even upon the defendant's appearance in court on 25.09.2020 through his counsel, he was not provided a copy of the plaint and the annexures.
3. Responsibility for Providing the Plaint:
- It is the plaintiff's responsibility to provide the defendant with a copy of the plaint along with the annexures. The court also bears responsibility to ensure that summons are issued properly as per Form IV under Order XXXVII, CPC.
4. Purpose of Summons and Form IV:
- The issuance of summons along with the copy of the plaint is intended to inform the defendant about the pendency and nature of the suit so they can prepare adequately for the proceedings.
- Form IV is specifically designed to notify the defendant of the limited time frame to seek permission to appear and defend the suit. If this procedure is not followed, any delay by the defendant in filing an application for leave to defend cannot be attributed to them.
5. Court's Duty:
- The court's duty extends beyond merely issuing summons; it must ensure that the summons are issued in compliance with Form IV requirements.
- Proper service of summons and delivery of the plaint are essential to uphold the defendant's right to a fair opportunity to defend the suit.
6. Penal Clause in Summary Procedure:
- Summary suits under Order XXXVII, CPC, include a penal clause where if the defendant fails to obtain permission to defend within the specified time frame, their right to defend may be struck down.
- This penal clause emphasizes the importance of proper service and notification procedures.
Conclusion:
The judgment emphasizes the procedural rigor required in summary suits under Order XXXVII, CPC. It highlights the responsibilities of both the plaintiff and the court in ensuring that the defendant is adequately informed and provided with necessary documents. Failure to comply with these procedural requirements can invalidate any attributed delay or default by the defendant in filing an application for leave to defend. The case underscores the importance of fair trial principles, ensuring that defendants are given a reasonable opportunity to prepare and present their defense.