Civil Procedure Code Project

JUDGMENT

ISHAN BISHT
III A
08810303811

1
 INDEX

S. No PARTICULARS Page No.

1. Table of Cases 3

2. Introduction 4

3. Definition 5

4. Pronouncement of Judgment 6

5. Contents of Judgment 9

6. Alteration in Judgment 11

7. Reasoning for Decision 13

8. Bibliography 15

2
 TABLE OF CASES

S.No CASE NAME CITATION

1. Surendra Singh v. State of U.P. AIR 1954 SC 194

2. R.C. Sharma v. Union of India AIR 1976 SC 2037

3. Anil Rai v. State of Bihar AIR 2001 SC 3173

4. Sangam Lal v. Rent Control and Eviction AIR 1966 All 221
Officer

5. Ram Ralaya v. The Official Receiver AIR 1976 Del 172

6. Ishwarbhai v. Vadilal AIR 1968 Guj 289

3
Introduction

The judgment forms the concluding part of the civil suit and it determines the
rights and liabilities of the parties. Basically judgment is followed by a decree
which is its operating part. Historically, there was the distinction between
judgment and decree. Common Law adheres to the judgment while the Equity
Court of Law deals with the decree. But later on Judicature Act was passed in
U.K. which merged the distinction between judgment and decree. In U.S. also,
distinction between judgment and decree has lost its relevance but in India,
the distinction between judgment and decree has still maintain its position
from the initiation of the old Code of Civil Procedure, 1859. The present Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 also recognizes this distinction.

In this legal world, judgment given by any court followed by its decree play an
important role to define the scope and limitations of any individual. Apart from
the statutory rules and regulations, one also has to adhere to the decision
given by the court to keep oneself away from the clutches of the court room
drama.

Daily various judgments are pronounced and decree following it took place in
the courts of our country. Various civil cases are also being disposed off each
working day. These judgments are important as they act as precedents for
future declarations, so it is very necessary that they stick to the judicial
reasoning without bringing their own discretionary power blindly. After so
many judgments and backing it up with the decree also, certain issues do
arises which tends to confuse us. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 has been drafted
very nicely but then also certain loopholes are there providing leeway for the
creeping of unnecessary elements. As no law seems to perfect for us but then
also effort should be made to take them somewhere close to the shell of
perfectness.

Decree is the operating part of the judgment and it has to be in harmony with
the judgment. Section 33 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 says decree is
followed by the judgment. Under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter
referred as C.P.C.) judgment and decree has been defined in the section 2 of
the C.P.C. and provisions related to it are given in the Order 20 of this Act.
Certain specific issues arise while dealing with this Order such as the time
frame for the pronouncement of the judgment; power to amend the decree;
reasons for each decision etc.

4
Definition
Under Section 2(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure “judgment” means the
statement given by the judge on the grounds of a decree or order. In the words
of Vivian Bose, J., a judgment may be said to be “the final decision of the court
intimated to the parties and to the world at large by formal ‘pronouncement’
or ‘delivery’ in open court”.1

In its broadest sense a judgment is the decision or sentence of the law given by
a court of justice or other competent tribunal as a result of proceedings
instituted therein, or the final consideration and determination of a court on
matters submitted to it in an action or proceeding, whether or not execution
follows thereon. More particularly it is a judicial determination that, on
matters submitted to a court for decision, a legal duty or liability does or does
not exist, or that, with respect to a claim in suit, no cause of action exists or
that no defence exists. In a broader sense here defined, a decision of any court
is a judgment. In a narrower sense the term “judgment” is limited to a decision
of a court of law. Under most codes of procedure, judgments are defined in
substance as the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action or
proceedings.

A judgment is the judicial act of a Court by which it accomplishes the purposes

of its creation. It is a judicial declaration by which the issues are settled and the
rights and liabilities of the parties are fixed as to the matters submitted for
decision. In other words, a judgment is the end of the law; its rendition is the
object for which jurisdiction is conferred and exercised, and it is the power by
means of which a liability is enforced against the debtor’s property. A
judgment constitutes the considered opinion of the court and is a solemn
record and formal expression and evidence of the actual decision of a law-suit.

As a general rule, courts are not constituted for the purpose of making
advisory decrees or resolving academic disputes. A proceeding seeking an
advisory opinion or judgment will not find favour at the hand of the judiciary. A
mere advisory opinion upon an abstract question is obviously not a judgment
at all when no parties are to be bound, and the rights of no one are directly
affected.

1
Surendra Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 1954 SC 194

5
Pronouncement of Judgment

Crystallizing judge’s intention into a formal shape in an open court leads the
judgment to its final destination. Rule 1 of Order 20 deals with the
pronouncement of judgment. It talks of specific time frame for the declaration
of the judgment in the open court. But there was no time limit prescribed for
the pronouncement of judgment prior to the amendment in 1976 which led to
a persistent demand all over India for the imposition of a reasonable time
frame for the declaration of judgment after the hearing of the case gets over.
In this regard, observation of the Supreme Court in R.C. Sharma v. Union of
India2 is worth noting;

“The Civil Procedure Code does not provide a time limit for the period between
the hearing of arguments and the delivery of a judgment. Nevertheless, we
think that an unreasonable delay between hearing of arguments and delivery
of a judgment, unless explained by exceptional or extraordinary circumstances,
is highly undesirable even when written arguments are submitted. It is not
unlikely that some points which the litigant considers important may have
escaped notice. But, what is more important is the litigants must have
complete confidence in the results of litigation. This confidence tends to be
shaken if there is excessive delay between hearing of arguments and delivery of
judgments. Justice, as we have often observed, must not only be done but must
manifestly appear to be done.”

Accordingly amendment was introduced providing a time limit for the

declaration of the judgment. If it is not possible to pronounce the judgment at
once, it should be declared within thirty days from the day of conclusion of the
hearing and in case some extreme situation arises then the provision is also
there to extend this declaration of pronouncement till the sixtieth day from
the conclusion of hearing. Thus judge have a discretionary power for the
pronouncement of judgment for these sixty days but after that declaration
becomes mandatory on the part of the judge.

2
AIR 1976 SC 2037

6
But what happens if the judgment is not pronounced within sixty days also.
Supreme Court has strongly deprecated the action of the High Court in the
case of Anil Rai v. State of Bihar3, where the judgment was pronounced after
two years.

Remarks of the honourable court in this case are just next to the truth and are
worth noting down:

1. The Constitution did not provide anything when High Court judges do not
pronounce judgments after lapse of several months presumably because the
architects of the Constitution believed that no High Court judge would cause
long and distressing delays. Such expectation of the makers of the Constitution
remained faultless during the early period of the post Constitution years. But
unfortunately, the later years have shown slackness on the part of a few judges
of the superior Courts in India with the result that the records remain consigned
to hibernation. Judges themselves normally forget the details of the facts and
niceties of the legal points advanced. Sometimes the interval is so long that the
judges forget even the fact that such a case is pending with them expecting
judicial verdict.

2. This confidence tends to be shaken if there is excessive delay between

hearing of arguments and delivery of judgments. A long delay in delivering the
judgment gives rise to unnecessary speculation in the minds of parties to a
case.

3. Excessive delay is not only against the provisions of law but in fact infringes
the right of personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. Any procedure or course of action which does not ensure a reasonable
quick adjudication has been termed to be unjust.

4. Justice should not only be done but should also appear to have been done.
Similarly whereas justice delayed is justice denied, justice withheld is even
worst than that.

5. In a country like ours where people consider the judges only second to God,
efforts be made to strengthen that belief of the common man. Delay in disposal
of the cases facilitates the people to raise eye-brows, some time genuinely
which, if not checked, may shake the confidence of the people in the judicial
system.

3
AIR 2001 SC 3173

7
Thus declaration of judgment within reasonable time is highly inevitable. In
order to raise the standard of the court in this regard certain guidelines has
also been given in the Anil Rai’s case. These guidelines are given below:

1. The Chief Justices of the High Courts may issue appropriate directions to the
Registry that in a case where the judgment is reserved and is pronounced later,
the judgment and date of pronouncing it be separately mentioned by the Court
officer concerned.

2. The Chief Justices of the High Courts should direct the Court
Officers/Readers of the various Benches in the High Courts to furnish every
month the list of cases in the matters where the judgments reserved are not
pronounced within the period of that month.

3. On noticing that after conclusion of the arguments the judgment is not

pronounced within a period of two months, the concerned Chief Justice shall
draw the attention of the Bench concerned to the pending matter.

4. Where a judgment is not pronounced within three months, from the date of
reserving it, any of the parties in the case is permitted to file an application in
the High Court with prayer for early judgment. Such application, as and when
filed, shall be listed before the Bench concerned within two days excluding the
intervening holidays.

5. If the judgment, for any reason, is not pronounced within a period of six
months, any of the parties of the said list shall be entitled to move an
application before the Chief Justice of the High Court with a prayer to withdraw
the said case and to make it over to any other bench for fresh arguments. It is
open to the Chief Justice to grant the said prayer or to pass any other order as
he deems fit in the circumstances.

8
Contents of Judgment

In the preparation and delivery of judgement the attention of the Civil Courts is
drawn to the following directions:

(1) The judgment should be written either in the language of the Court, or in
English:

(2) When a judgment is not written by the Presiding Officer with his hand,
every page of such judgment shall be signed by him;

(3) It should be pronounced in open Court after it has been written and signed;

(4) It should be dated and signed in open Court at the time of being
pronounced and when once signed shall not afterwards be altered or added to,
save as provided by Section 152 or on review;

(5) If it is judgment of any Court other than a Court of Small Causes, it should
contain a concise statement of the case; the points for determination the
decision thereon and the reasons for such decision;

(6) If it is the judgment of a Court of Small Causes, it should contain the points
for determination and the decision thereupon.

(7) It should contain the direction of the Court as to costs; and

(8) All the paragraphs of the judgment should be serially numbered to facilitate
references.

(9) The judgment should be pronounced as soon as possible after the case has
been heard. Where it is desired to pronounce at some future date, the Court
shall fix a day for that purpose and inform the parties accordingly. Every
endeavour shall be made by the Court to pronounce the judgment within
fifteen days from the date on which the hearing of the case was concluded, but
where it is not practicable so to do, the Court should make all efforts to
pronounce it within thirty days, otherwise the Court shall record the reasons
for such delay and shall fix a future day on which this judgment will be

9
pronounced and due notice of the day so fixed shall be given to the parties or
their pleaders.

(10) The Judge need not read out the full judgment. He can pronounce only the
final orders. However, the copy of the whole judgment is to be made available
for the perusal of the parties or their pleaders immediately after judgment is
pronounced.

(11) The judgment may be pronounced by dictation in open Court to a

shorthand writer if the Judge is specially empowered by the High Court in this
behalf and is to be dated and signed by the Judge.

(12) In appealable cases, where the parties are not represented by their
pleaders, the Court should inform the parties present in Court as to the Court
to which an appeal lies and the period of limitation for the filing of such appeal
and place on record the information so give to the parties.

(13) The last paragraph of the judgment shall state in precise terms the relief
which has been granted by such judgment.

(14) The type written copies of judgment may be delivered to the parties
applying for such copies after making the requisite payments thereof.

(15) Rules regulating the preparation and supply of certified copies of type-
written judgments in civil cases by Courts provided with stenographers/steno
typist are given in schedule.

10
Alteration in Judgment

Before the pronouncement of judgment, every right is with the judge to

change his mind but the dilemma arises in the situation when judgment has
been declared in the open court and after that something strikes to the judge
which prompts him to alter the judgment; so the question arises will the
changed mind frame should be given prevalence over the old decision or old
should be preserved from the new one? Rule 3 of Order 20 of C.P.C. provides
that a judgment once signed cannot be amended or altered afterwards except-

i. to correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes or errors due to accidental

slips or omissions as mentioned in section 152 of the C.P.C. or
ii. on review as mentioned in section 114 of the C.P.C

According to Allahabad High Court in Sangam Lal v. Rent Control and Eviction
Officer4, a judgment dictated in an open court can be changed, even
completely, before it is signed provided notice is given to all parties concerned
and they are heard before the change is made. Reasoning given for this
judgment was that they do not want to construe the rules too technically as
they are indeed rules to further the ends of justice; so they should not be
viewed too narrowly.

This view of the Allahabad High Court was also accepted by the Delhi High
Court in the case of Ram Ralaya v. The Official Receiver5. But the Gujarat High
Court disagreed with this view and was of the opinion that once a judgment
has been pronounced or delivered in an open court, though formal corrections
may be made before the judge signs it, the core of it cannot be altered or
changed so as to modify the order or amend or even set it at naught.

Basically judgment is the final decision of the court intimated to the parties
and to the world at the large in an open court. This declaration is the intention
of the mindset of the court after going through the tedious process of the
wholesome hearing. This intention of the court is the final operative decision
of the court which constitutes the decision.

4
AIR 1966 All 221
5
AIR 1976 Del 172

11
Regarding this, the Gujarat High Court in the case of Ishwarbhai6 mentions
some worthwhile remarks.

It says that, “as soon as the judgment is delivered, that becomes the operative
pronouncement of the Court. The law then provides for the manner in which it
is to be authenticated and made certain. The rules regarding this differ but they
do not form the essence of the matter and if there is any irregularity in carrying
them out it is curable. Thus, if a judgment happens not to be signed and is
inadvertently consequent on acted on and executed, the proceedings
consequent on it would be valid because the judgment, if it can be shown to
have been validly delivered, would stand good despite defects in the mode of
this subsequent authentication”.

The court can do some formal corrections but the core of it cannot be altered
or changed so as to modify the order or amend or even set at naught the
same. That can be done only by the Court in appeal or in revision. Even with
the consent or agreement of the parties also, a judgment cannot be altered or
amended.

Allowing alteration before signing of judgment but after declaration in the

open court raises doubt regarding the sanctity of the judgment.

6
Ishwarbhai v. Vadilal, AIR 1968 Guj 289

12
Reasoning for Decision

Before starting anything, it is very necessary to lay down the ground; before
judging also something, it is quite crucial to have full facts before it and then
take out the relevant portions to make a concise statement of the case. Thus, a
judgment should inaugurate with the facts of the case in brief.

Rule 4(2) of Order 20 of C.P.C. states that apart from the judgment of Small
Cause Courts, judgments of all other Courts shall contain a concise statement
of the case; the points for determination; the decision thereon; and the
reasons for such decision.

Thus after laying down the facts, facts in issue should be settled by bringing
out the claims which are disputed between both the parties; thus issues should
be framed. Framing of issues should be done via Rule 1 of Order 14 of C.P.C.

Now after issues are framed, points for determination come into picture and
for determining those points, need for extra force is required. It is not possible
to cruise through the disputed facts in the absence of any peaceful land. In
order to satisfactorily reach on a judicial determination of a disputed claim
where substantial questions of law or fact arise, it has to be supported by the
most cogent reasons; a mere order deciding the matter in dispute without any
reasoning is no judgment at all Power of reasoning is needed to back up the
decision on each issue given by the court under Rule 5 of Order 20 of this
Code.
Rule 2 of Order 14 of C.P.C. provides judgment to be given on all the issues
that has arisen in the given case. Rule 1 of the same Order provides for framing
of issues with the object of keeping the various points arising for decision
separate and distinct and to avoid the confusion later on.

As per Rule 5 of Order 20 of C.P.C. court has to state its decision with reasons
on each issue separately unless the finding upon any one or more of the issues
is sufficient for the decision of the suit. But Rule 2 of Order 14 of C.P.C.
requires that a court should decide on all issues even if the case can be decided
by settling few issues only except where a pure question of law relating to
jurisdiction or bar to suit is involved. Further with the addition of an
explanation to Rule 22 of Order 41 of C.P.C. which empowers a respondent in
appeal to file cross objection in respect of findings against him in a decree
notwithstanding that by reason of the decision of the court on any other
finding which is sufficient for the decision of the suit the decree is wholly or in

13
part in favour of the respondent, the intention of the legislature is clear that
the court will now have to decide and state its findings on all the issues even if
it considers that finding for one or only few issues is sufficient for the disposal
of the case. Thus in order to have a harmonious construction of all these rules,
it would be judicial to amend the Rule 5 of Order 20 of C.P.C. by omission of
the words unless the finding upon any one or more of the issues is sufficient
for the decision of the suit at the end . Moreover, principle of res-judicata
operates after the determination of the case; so in case if judgment is not
given by deciding all the issues then problem can erupt in future whether the
rule of res-judicata will operate or not for that particular issue.

There is ambiguity whether recording of reasons for each issue is one of the
principle of natural justice or not but it is inevitable for providing safeguard
against possible injustice and arbitrariness and provides protection to the
person adversely affected

The court must decide all the issues of fact, which arise between the parties as
if the appellate Court takes a different view; the parties are saved from further
harassment. Court has to refer in its judgment all the submissions made before
it and have to deal with it even if the court is of the opinion that there is no
substance in any of the submission; in those extreme situations the Court may
just refer to the same and say that there is no substance.

In the absence of discussion in detail of the evidence by the parties, it cannot

be said that its judgment is no judgment in the eyes of law. All the court has to
do is to frame proper issues and to keep in mind all the points involved in the
case and has discussed all those points, though in brief; thus giving full respect
to the judgment.

Problem arises where there is absolutely no evidence on the record and the
plaintiff is wholly unable to proceed with the case; in that situation an order
simply dismissing the suit without a finding on every issue is not bad. It would
be a sheer formality to write a judgment on each issue in these scenarios.

14
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Justice C.K. Thakker (Takwani), Civil Procedure (7th edn., Lucknow:

Eastern Book Company, 2013)

2. Sudipto Sarkar & VR Manohar, Sarkar’s The Law of Civil Procedure Vol. 1
(10th edn., New Delhi: Wadhwa & Company Nagpur, 2002)

3. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/jud_dec.htm

4. delhihighcourt.nic.in/writereaddata/upload/CourtRules/CourtRuleFile_A
F9J1IE4.PDF

5. https://pakistanilaws.wordpress.com/tag/essentials-of-judgement-in-
pakistan/

15