2015 (5) TMI 1231

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s contention, he had relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in M/s. Kapil Corepack Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harbans Lal (D) Thr. Lrs. decided on 03rd August, 2010 wherein the Apex Court had quoted with approval the judgment of the Madras High Court in Vasantharoya Koudan & Ors. AIR 1949 Madras 707. The relevant quotation from the Madras High Court's judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- "At the outset it must be pointed out that this (Order 10 Rule 2) does not provide for an examination on oath. This provision was intended to be used to elucidate the matters in controversy in suit before the trial began. This is not a provision intended to be used to supersede the usual procedure to be followed at the trial." 2. Undoubtedly, the stat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d under Oath. 6. As far as the option of defendant No.1 to refuse to be examined under Order 10 CPC is concerned, this Court is of the view that the consequence for the same is provided in Order 10 Rule 4(2) of CPC which reads as under:- "Order X Examination of Parties by the Court 4. Consequence of refusal or inability of pleader to answer. xxx                          xxx                          xxx (2) If such party fails without lawful excuse to appear in perso....