THE LEGITIMACY AND JUSTIFICATION OF PLEADINGS IN CIVIL SUITS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO BANGLADESH: A LEGAL APPRAISAL

Main Article Content

MD. SHAHIDUL ISLAM

Abstract

Pleading is that the starting stage of a suit within which parties formally submits their truthful claims and defenses. The litigator submits a grievance stating the reason for cause of action -- the permanent record or problems in their respective matters. The litigant submits a solution to the competent Court stating his or her defenses and denials. The litigant may additionally submit a counterclaim explains a reason for action against the litigator. Pleadings serve a crucial operate of providing notice to the litigant that a suit has been instituted regarding a particular controversies. It additionally provides notice to the litigator of the defendant's intentions with reference to the suit which indicate burden of proof.

Long-standing common law rules of pleading were difficult and rigorous. In Pleadings parties are usually entitled to evidence thrown out of the Court for technical flaws in trial. Today, in most if not all states, a pleading should now not adjust to archaic formats, however is also a straightforward petition or grievance setting forth the relevant facts and inquiring for a remedy.

Keywords:
Litigator, cause of action, pleadings, rigorous

Article Details

How to Cite
ISLAM, M. S. (2020). THE LEGITIMACY AND JUSTIFICATION OF PLEADINGS IN CIVIL SUITS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO BANGLADESH: A LEGAL APPRAISAL. Asian Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Studies, 3(1), 15-21. Retrieved from https://ikprress.org/index.php/AJAHSS/article/view/5044
Section
Original Research Article

References

Zamir Uddin Ahmed vs. Aiaul Huq, 49 DLR 622.

Magha PC. Law of Pleadings in India (with Precedents), 1st Edn, Eastern Law Book House. 1974;1.

Order VI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Sonali Bank vs. Hare Krishna, 49 DLR 282.

Ram Sarup Gupta vs. BNI College, AIR 1987 SC 1242.

Thorp vs. Holdworth, [1876] 3 Ch.D 637.

Ram Sarup vs. BNI Collge, AIR 1987 SC 1242.

Zamiruding vs. Ziaul Haq, 49 DLR 622.

Girdhari vs. Koolahul, 2 MIA 344.

Order 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Kedar Lal vs Hari Lal, AIR 1952 SC 47 (5).

Gouri Dutt Ganesh vs. Madho Prasad, AIR, 1943, 147.

Registrar vs. Sahrab Jan, 48 DLR 214.

Hasenuddin vs. Bangladesh, 6 BLC 54.

Sheshadri v. Pai, (1969) ISCE27, pp.34-35.

Order 6, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Order 6, Rule 3, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 4, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 5, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 6, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 7, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 8, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 9, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 10, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 11, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 12, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 13, ibid.

Rule 21 of the Supreme Court Rules Order (SCRO).

Rule 20, ibid.

Rule 17, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 5, Dr. AH Ali Haider Qureshi vs. Dr. Ali Qureshi, 65 DLR 197.

Order 6, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Deputy Commissioner vs. Md. Abdul Jabbar Sheikh, 59 DLR (AD) 105.

Order 6, Rule 14, ibid.

Order 6, Rule 15, ibid.

Md. Shamsul Huda vs. Bangladesh, 2000 DLD (AD) 48.

Order 6, ibid.

Tildersley vs. Harper, (1878) 10 Ch.D 39.

Ibid, at p. 655. See also Patil v. Patil, AIR 1957 SC 363(366).

Ibid, at p. 399 (SCC): 1130 (AIR).

Modi. Spg. & Wvg. Mills vs. Ladha Ram, (1976) 4 SCC 320(321-22). P.I.

Brij Kishore vs. Smt. Khatoon, AIR 1976 All 399.

Indu Bhusan vs. Hareram, AIR 1972 pat 229.

R.18. see also Jerry vs. Union of India, AIR 130, 1974 SCR (2) 178.

Bhugwan Das vs. Haji Abu, (1922) I.L.R. 47 Bom.

Jainul Abedin vs. Bibi Nisha Khatoon, AIR 1984 Pat 251.

Anath Bandhu Guha & Sons Ltd. vs. Sudhanshu Shekhar Halder, 42 DLR (AD) 244.