Yes, the Court fee of a civil suit is applicable under order 37 of Code Procedure
This order has always been a matter of dispute
. To give justice to those who have been
suffering the act of dishonoring
for a very long period, the concern related to this problem has been led down in this provision, As order 37 of code Procedure
. The order can be stated as -
- This provision of the Law provides the legal Right to suit against a person who is not returning the money. Here returning means the return of debt,
hundies, liquidated demand payable on a written contract, and any promissory notes.
- This Right provides us a speedy trial to recover it and this is the reason it is also known as the
Recovery Right. And to have a unique quality, it provides a speedy trial for the
- This provision has two rules one is 2(3) and the other is 2(6) by which it can order the defendant to return the money. These are as follows-
- 2(3) states the procedure to give his appearances in the court within the
10 days from the service of summons on him. And after entertaining the appearances,
the plaintiff will serve the judgment on the defendant within the 10 days
of the complaint explaining the cause of action, damages for the compliant, and in a belief, there is no defence for the suit.
- 2(6) states that if the defendant does not apply for leave to defend, (1)the plaintiff can ask for the judgment on the same day
or the (2) the court may pass the order to the defendant for returning the money or the debt which is deemed fir for the plaintiff.
The famous case related to order 37 of CPC
In this case, the Supreme Court has decided the defence merits of the defendant to defend himself. And we can also say that this is the
crux of all the judgments related to order 37 of CPC.
The main points of the judgment are as follows-
- If the defendant satisfied the court that he has a good defence ground then the
defendant is entitled to unconditional leave to defend.
- Even though the defendant says that he has a fair or
reasonable defence, although not a possibly good defence, the defendant is entitled to leave to defend
- If the defendant has the claim of having the imaginary or practical defence even though he is not entitled to leave to defend.