A suit may be dismissed under Order 9 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:<br>1. Where the summons is not served upon the defendant in consequence of the plaintiffs failure to pay costs for service of summons.<br>2. Where neither the plaintiff nor the defendant appears.<br>3. Where plaintiff, after summons returned unserved, fails for 7 days to apply for fresh summons.<br>4. Where on the date fixed for hearing in a suit only defendant appears and he does not admit the plaintiffs claim.

Where the summons to the defendant(s) is returned unserved and the plaintiff fails to apply for issuance of fresh summons to the defendant within 7 days of the return, the suit of the plaintiff is liable to be

A

Rejected under Order VII, Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure

B

Dismissed under Order IX, Rule 2 of Code of Civil Procedure

C

Dismissed under Order IX, Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure

D

Either A or B or C

A Suit may be dismissed where, after a summons has been issued to the defendant and returned unserved, plaintiff fails the apply for fresh summons for the period of-

A

Seven days

B

Sixty days

C

One month

D

Two months when the plaintiff fails to apply for fresh summons from the court

Where a summons to the defendant(s) is returned unserved, under Order IX, Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff has to apply for issuance of fresh summons to the defendant(s) within

A

14 days of the return

B

7 days of the return

C

One month of the return

D

15 days of the return

Mark the incorrect proposition:
1. Set-off is a statutory defence to a plaintiff's action, whereas a counterclaim is a cross-action.
2. Set-off and counter-claim arises out of the same transaction.
3. Set-off should not be barred on the date of the suit while counter-claim should not be barred on the date of filing of written statement.
4. Claim for set-off cannot exceed plaintiff's claim, whereas counterclaim can exceed the plaintiffs claim.
5. Both set-off and counter-claim cannot exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court.

A

1 only

B

2 only

C

3 and 5

D

4 only

In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the objection of non-impleadment of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit, under section 14 of Limitation Act is

A

Liable to be excluded on the ground that the plaintiff was prosecuting the earlier suit with due diligence and in good faith

B

Not liable to be excluded as the plaintiff cannot be said to be prosecuting the earlier suit with due diligence and in good faith

C

Liable to be excluded under section 14(3) of Limitation Act

D

To be excluded or not to be excluded is in the discretion of the court

Propositions are:
1. Set-off and counter-claim arises out of the same transaction.
2. Set-off should not be barred on the date of the suit while counter-claim should not be barred on the date of filing of written statement.
3. Claim for set-off cannot exceed plaintiff's claim, whereas counter-claim can exceed the plaintiff's claim.
In respect of the aforesaid which is correct:

A

All 1, 2 and 3 are correct

B

1 and 2 are correct 3 is incorrect

C

1 and 3 are correct 2 is incorrect

D

2 and 3 are correct 1 is incorrect

In a suit for recovery of Rs. 25 lakh, the Defendant files its written statement and pleads that it does not owe any money to the Plaintiff but in fact, it is entitled to recover the sum of Rs. 40 lakh from the Plaintiff. The Defendant, however, does not file a counter claim. Can the Defendant file the counter claim at a subsequent stage in the suit or file a fresh suit seeking recovery of Rs, 40 lakhs?

A

The counter claim and suit would be barred

B

Only the counter claim would be barred

C

The Defendant can file both either a counter claim or a suit

D

The Defendant's claim stands abandoned

Which of the following order a court may pass under Order IX, Rule 3 Code of Civil Procedure in a suit where neither plaintiff nor defendant appears on fixed day of hearing?

A

Simple adjournment

B

Dismissal of suit

C

Imposition of costs

D

Adjournment sine-die

E

None of these

An order under O. 33, r 11 directing the pauper plaintiff to pay the Court-fees can only be made in which of the following cases?
1. Where the plaintiff fails in the suit
2. Where the plaintiff is dispaupered under r 9
3. Where the suit is withdrawn
4. Where the suit is dismissed under the circumstances specified in clause (a) or cl. (b)

A

1, 3, 4

B

2, 4

C

3, 4

D

All of these

A civil suit was repeatedly fixed by the trial court for examination of the defendant's witnesses but the said opportunity was not availed by the defendant, therefore on 18^th November 2016 when neither the defendant nor his counsel had appeared, the trial court had proceeded ex parte and heard the final arguments and reserved the case for judgement. On 28^th November 2016 the defendant had filed an application under Order 9 Rule 7 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure which is

A

Maintainable

B

Non-maintainable

C

Matter of discretion of the court to accept or not

D

Matter of inherent power of the court to accept or not

Related Questions