Imposition of Costs
x
(Querist) 26 March 2011
This query is : Resolved
The court has imposed cost on the plaintiff because the witnesses who were to be produced for cross examination did not appear on a number of dates. My question is that if the plaintiff does not pay then is the suit dismissed or merely is the evidence of the plaintiff closed and the suit proceeds.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 26 March 2011
plaintiff's further evidence will be closed if the cost is precedent, some times if suit dismisses with cost, the imposed cost will be added to the cost.
Parveen Kr. Aggarwal
(Expert) 26 March 2011
The costs can be said to have been imposed under section 35-B of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which reads as:
"35-B. Costs for causing delay: (1) If, on any date fixed for the hearing of a suit or for taking any step therein, a party to the suit:
(a) fails to take the step which he was required by or under this Code to take on that date, or
(b) obtains an adjournment for taking such step or for producing evidence or on any other ground,
the Court may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order requiring such party to pay to the other party such costs as would, in the opinion of the Court, be reasonably sufficient to reimburse the other party in respect of the expenses incurred by him in attending the Court on that date, and payment of such costs, on the date next following the date of such order, shall be a condition precedent to the further prosecution of:
(a) the suit by the plaintiff, where the plaintiff was ordered to pay such costs.
(b) the defence by the defendant, where the defendant was ordered to pay such costs.
Explanation.Where separate defences have been raised by the defendants or groups of defendants, payment of such costs shall be a condition precedent to the further prosecution of the defence by such defendants or groups of defendants as have been ordered by the Court to pay such costs.
(2) The costs, ordered to be paid under sub-section (1) shall not, if paid, be included in the costs awarded in the decree passed in the suit; but, if such costs are not paid, a separate order shall be drawn up indicating the amount of such costs and the names and addresses of the persons by whom such costs are payable and the order so drawn up shall be executable against such persons."
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 26 March 2011
It is neither closure of the evidence nor the dismissal of the suit.
It is a compensation awarded to the opposite party.
Therefore the plaintiff would be advised to pay the cost imposed.
Sri Vijayan.A
(Expert) 27 March 2011
Well advised by Mr.RR.
It is only the compensation to the defendant; this does not mean dismissal of suit or it may pave way or an indication of dismissal.
x
(Querist) 29 March 2011
Thank you all for your prompt replies
