https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200275 A dismissal is treated as one on the merits under Order 17, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, where the plaintiff's culpable negligence leaves no evidence to support the claim and the court decides the matter on the materials before it. In such a situation, the plaintiff's presence or absence is not decisive because the suit is disposed of notwithstanding default. The court therefore held that the prior dismissal was a merits-based decision under Order 17, Rule 3, and not a dismissal for default under Order 41, Rule 17. en-us Tue, 23 Feb 1926 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:32:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200275 A dismissal is treated as one on the merits under Order 17, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, where the plaintiff's culpable negligence leaves no evidence to support the claim and the court decides the matter on the materials before it. In such a situation, the plaintiff's presence or absence is not decisive because the suit is disposed of notwithstanding default. The court therefore held that the prior dismissal was a merits-based decision under Order 17, Rule 3, and not a dismissal for default under Order 41, Rule 17. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Feb 1926 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200275