Court may grant time and adjourn hearing
Full Text
(1) The court may, if sufficient cause is shown, at any stage of the suit grant time to the parties or to any of them, and may from time to time adjourn the hearing of the suit for reasons to be recorded in writing: Provided that no such adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a party during hearing of the suit.
(2) Costs of adjournment.—In every such case the Court shall fix a day for the further hearing of the suit, and shall make such orders as to costs occasioned by the adjournment or such higher costs as the court deems fit: Provided that,—
(a) when the hearing of the suit has commenced, it shall be continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Court finds that, for the exceptional reasons to be recorded by it, the adjournment of the hearing beyond the following day is necessary;
(b) no adjournment shall be granted at the request of a party, except where the circumstances are beyond the control of that party;
(c) the fact that the pleader of a party is engaged in another Court, shall not be a ground for adjournment;
(d) where the illness of a pleader or his inability to conduct the case for any reason, other than his being engaged in another Court, is put forward as a ground for adjournment, the Court shall not grant the adjournment unless it is satisfied that the party applying for adjournment could not have engaged another pleader in time;
(e) where a witness is present in Court but a party or his pleader is not present or the party or his pleader, though present in Court, is not ready to examine or cross-examine the witness, the Court may, if it thinks fit, record the statement of the witness and pass such orders as it thinks fit dispensing with the examination-in-chief or cross-examination of the witness, as the case may be, by the party or his pleader not present or not ready as aforesaid.
Plain English Summary
Regulates the granting of adjournments in civil trials, introducing a statutory ceiling of three adjournments per party, mandating day-to-day trial once commenced, barring counsel engagement elsewhere as an excuse, and empowering the court to close cross-examination if counsel is unready.
Key Legal Elements
- Three-Adjournment Cap (Sub-rule 1): Statutory limit of 3 adjournments per party during trial.
- Sufficient Cause & Recorded Reasons: Adjournments cannot be granted as a matter of mechanical routine.
- Day-to-Day Trial Mandate (Clause a): Continuous witness examination once trial begins.
- Circumstances Beyond Control (Clause b): Strict threshold for entertaining adjournment requests.
- Counsel Engaged Elsewhere Barred (Clause c): Busy in another court is statutorily rejected as a ground.
- Pleader Illness Exception (Clause d): Must show inability to engage alternate counsel in time.
- Closing Cross-Examination / Nil Opportunity (Clause e): Witness statement recorded and right to examine/cross-examine forfeited.
Practical Note
The 3-Adjournment Rule & Closing of Evidence in Courtroom Practice: 1. Landmark Ruling - Salem Advocate Bar Association (II) v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 344: The Supreme Court held that the proviso to Order XVII Rule 1 limiting adjournments to three is directory and not mandatory. In extreme and exceptional circumstances beyond the party's control, the court may grant more than three adjournments, but only upon recording reasons and imposing exemplary costs. 2. Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. (2011) 9 SCC 678: The Supreme Court reiterated that adjournments are not a matter of right. A litigant who exhausts three adjournments without diligence risks having their evidence closed. 3. The 'Passover' vs. Adjournment Trap: Proviso (c) expressly bars 'counsel busy in another court'. Never state counsel is arguing in the High Court; file an application showing genuine unavoidable emergency under Clause (b). 4. Invoking Clause (e) - Nil Opportunity: If the adversary brings excuses when your witness is in the box, immediately move the Court: 'Under Order XVII Rule 1(2) Proviso (e) CPC, the witness is physically present; the defendant's cross-examination be treated as Nil and the witness discharged'.
हिंदी पाठ
(1) न्यायालय, यदि पर्याप्त हेतुक (Sufficient cause) दर्शित किया जाता है, तो वाद के किसी भी प्रक्रम पर पक्षकारों को या उनमें से किसी को समय दे सकेगा, और लिखित में अभिलिखित किए जाने वाले कारणों से वाद की सुनवाई को समय-समय पर स्थगित कर सकेगा: परन्तु वाद की सुनवाई के दौरान किसी पक्षकार को तीन बार से अधिक (Not more than three times) ऐसा स्थगन नहीं दिया जाएगा।
(2) स्थगन के खर्चे: ऐसे प्रत्येक मामले में न्यायालय वाद की अगली सुनवाई के लिए एक दिन नियत करेगा, तथा स्थगन से उत्पन्न खर्चों या ऐसे उच्चतर खर्चों के बारे में, जैसा न्यायालय ठीक समझे, आदेश करेगा: परन्तु यह कि—
(क) जब वाद की सुनवाई प्रारंभ हो चुकी हो, तो वह दिन-प्रतिदिन (Day-to-day) तब तक निरंतर जारी रखी जाएगी जब तक कि उपस्थित सभी साक्षियों की परीक्षा न हो जाए, जब तक कि न्यायालय का यह निष्कर्ष न हो कि उसके द्वारा अभिलिखित किए जाने वाले असाधारण कारणों से अगले दिन से आगे सुनवाई स्थगित करना आवश्यक है;
(ख) किसी पक्षकार की प्रार्थना पर कोई स्थगन तब तक नहीं दिया जाएगा जब तक कि परिस्थितियां उस पक्षकार के नियंत्रण से परे न हों;
(ग) यह तथ्य कि किसी पक्षकार का प्लीडर (अधिवक्ता) किसी अन्य न्यायालय में व्यस्त है, स्थगन का कोई आधार नहीं होगा;
(घ) जहां किसी प्लीडर की बीमारी या किसी अन्य न्यायालय में व्यस्त होने से भिन्न किसी कारण से मामले का संचालन करने में उसकी असमर्थता को स्थगन का आधार बनाया जाता है, वहां न्यायालय तब तक स्थगन नहीं देगा जब तक कि उसका यह समाधान न हो जाए कि स्थगन चाहने वाला पक्षकार समय रहते किसी अन्य प्लीडर को नियुक्त नहीं कर सकता था;
(ङ) जहां कोई साक्षी न्यायालय में उपस्थित है किन्तु कोई पक्षकार या उसका प्लीडर उपस्थित नहीं है अथवा न्यायालय में उपस्थित होने पर भी साक्षी की परीक्षा या प्रतिपरीक्षा (Cross-examination) करने के लिए तैयार नहीं है, वहां न्यायालय यदि ठीक समझे, तो साक्षी का बयान दर्ज कर सकेगा और अनुपस्थित या तैयार न होने वाले पक्षकार या प्लीडर द्वारा साक्षी की मुख्य परीक्षा या प्रतिपरीक्षा से अभिमुक्ति (Dispensing with) देने का ऐसा आदेश पारित कर सकेगा जैसा वह उचित समझे।