PRAHLAD Vs. SURINDER HARA FOUNDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. Civil Revision No.3357 of 2015

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the plaintiffs read to me the questions raised through the application filed under Order 12 Rule 4/5 CPC which as I have observed already relate to an alleged Will of S. Ikram Singh said to have been executed on 18.01.2011, the trust which he had created in respect of his properties and the nature of relationship that he had with the defendant. The provision of Order 12 Rule 4 CPC would show that it would be open for the party to cause the other party to either admit for the purposes of suit only, any specific facts or facts mentioned in the notice and if there is a refusal to admit, the court would be at liberty to allow for the costs for proving such facts whatever may be the result, unless the court otherwise directed.

(3.) I am unable to accept the contentions made by the learned senior counsel that the Order 12 Rule 4 CPC cannot be invoked before filing the written statement. It would be probably appropriate that if the written statement is also filed and when issues are framed, any party may apply to a court under Order 12 Rule 4 CPC to cause admissions to be made and obviate the scope of proving matters which are admitted and thereby saving time and expenses for both the court and the parties for proving matters which are admitted. If the questions are raised seeking for admissions and admissions are made by a party in form-11 of Appendix C to the Civil Procedure Code, then the procedure that would be followed by the court is what is mentioned under Rule 6 allowing for a judgment to be passed in terms of such admissions. The rule is permissive and it does not preclude a party not to avail to himself of such opportunity and proceed to trial in the ordinary way. The Rule actually does not even contemplate an interim order. If there is an admission, the court will pass judgment on admission under Rule 6.