Supreme Court Rules 2013 - Order XXV | Order 25
Supreme Court Rules 2013 and Supreme Court Rules 1966 (Repealed)
Supreme Court Rules 2013:
Parties To Suits
1. Two or more plaintiffs may join in one suit in whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist.
2. Two or more defendants may be joined in one suit against whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist.
3. (1) The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any plaintiff or defendant improperly joined be struck out, and that the name of any plaintiff or defendant who ought to have been joined, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added.
(2) No person shall be added as a plaintiff without his consent.
4. Where it appears to the Court that any cause of action joined in one suit cannot conveniently be tried or disposed of together the Court may order separate trials or make such other order as may be expedient.
5. Where it appears to the Court that any joinder of plaintiffs or defendants may embarrass or delay the trial of the suit, the Court may order separate trials or make such order as may be expedient.
Supreme Court Rules 1966:
WRITTEN STATEMENT, SET-OFF AND COUNTER-CLAIM
1. It shall not be sufficient for a defendant in his written statement to deny
generally the facts alleged by the plaintiff but he shall deal specifically with each
allegation of fact of which he does not admit the truth, except damage.
2. Where a defendant denies an allegation of fact he shall not do so evasively
but shall answer the point of substance.
3. Each allegation of fact in the plaint, if not denied specifically or by necessary
implication, or not expressly stated to be not admitted in the pleading of the
defendant, shall be taken to be admitted, but the Court may in its discretion require
any fact so admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admission.
4. Where the defendant claims to set-off against a demand by the plaintiff any
ascertained sum of money, he may in his written statement, but not afterwards without
the leave of the Court, state the grounds of his claim and the particulars of the debt
sought to be set-off.
5. The written statement containing the particulars mentioned in rule 4 of this
order shall have the same effect as a plaint in a cross suit so as to enable the Court
to pronounce a final judgment in respect both of the original claim and of set-off.
6. The rules relating to a written statement by a defendant shall apply to a
THE SUPREME COURT RULES, 1966
written statement by a plaintiff in answer to a claim of set-off.
7. No pleading subsequent to the written statement of a defendant other than
by way of defence to a set-off shall be presented except by the leave of the Court
and upon such terms as the Court may think fit, but the Court may at any time require
a written statement or additional written statement from any of the parties and may
fix a time for presenting the same.
8. Where any party from whom a written statement is so required fails to
present the same within the time fixed by the Court, the Court may pronounce
judgment against him or make such orders in relation to the suit as it thinks
9. The defendant, in addition to his right of pleading a set-off may set up by
way of counter-claim against the claims of the plaintiff any right or claim in respect
of a cause of action accruing to him either before or after the filing of the suit but
before he has delivered his defence and before the time limited for delivering his
defence has expired whether that counter-claim sounds in damages or not, and the
counter-claim shall have the same effect as a cross-suit, so as to enable the Court
to pronounce a final judgment in the same suit, both on the original claim and on
10. The Court may if in its opinion the counter-claim cannot be disposed of in
the pending suit or ought not to be allowed, refuse permission to the defendant to
avail himself thereof, and require him to file a separate suit