KIRAN CHHABRA Vs. PAWAN KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for the plaintiff has filed the brief note of submissions. However, the learned Counsel has utterly failed to address the number of judgments relating to the issues involved. Some of the relevant judgments in this regard to the notice of this Court are Harshad Chiman Lal Modi v. DLF Universal and Anr., 2005 AIR(SC) 4446, Shri Sant Singh v. Shri K.G. Ringshia, CS(OS) No. 2011/1984 decided on 24th May, 2010, Splendor Landbase Limited v. Mirage Infra Limited and Anr., CS(OS) No. 582/2009 decided on 8th February, 2010 and Splendor Landbase Limited v. Mirage Infra Limited and Anr., FAO(OS) No. 150/2010 decided on 9th April, 2010.

(2.) When the Court calls for written arguments to be submitted, it is expected to be something as would assist the Court in its endeavour to do justice and decide the case. Simply filing a list of judgments and attaching photocopies does not assist the Court nor does filing long-winded arguments which are not structured and properly arranged.

(3.) Written arguments, which Order XVIII Rule 2(3A) of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure also recognizes, ought to be such that would assist the Court. The pattern would vary from case to case but generally Written Arguments should comprise a very brief list of dates, the admitted facts and the disputed facts. The points to be decided should be duly formulated as questions or propositions. In case issues have been framed, separate arguments on each issue are necessary unless two or more issues are such which can be more conveniently addressed together. The factual premises on which a particular argument is given has to be stated on each issue so that the proposition can be appreciated in that light.