AKHIL KUMAR JAIN Vs. SHARDA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist.

(2.) The revisionist is a tenant and Defendant in the suit filed by the Plaintiff being Case No. 4 of 2009. The revisionist moved an application before the court below for framing of the issues. The said application has been rejected vide order dated 28th March, 2011 on the ground that it is not mandatory to frame issues in SCC case.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the revisionist submitted that Order XX, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the judgments of a Court of Small Causes need not contain more than points for determination and the decision thereon. The word "Point for determination" has been interpreted by the Apex Court in the case of Rameshwar Dayal v. Banda (dead) through his Legal Representatives and Anr. reported in, 1993 (1) ARC 249 wherein it has been held that the "Point for determination" referred to in Rule 4(1) are obviously nothing but issues contemplated by Rules 1 and 3 of Order XIV of the Code. Therefore, before proceeding with the case, the issue ought to have been framed.