PLAINT

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION NASIK

Summary Suit No. 1987
A son of B, aged about 50 years,
occupation business, residing at
7 Green Park, NasikPlaintiff
VERSUS
C son of D, aged about 40 years,
occupation service, residing at
5 College Street, Nasik..Defendant

The abovenamed Plaintiff' states as follows:

1. That the plaintiff is a money-lender and has been carrying on the business of money lending in
Nasik City, Nasik. the defendant is serving as clerk in 'Mathurs& Sons Pvt. Ltd. The plaintiff knows
the defendant for the last several years.
2. That the defendant on or about the. 15th day of.May 1984, approached the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.
15000 which sum the defendant then needed for the purchase of a plot of land in the suburbs of the
city. The plaintiff agreed to lend and advance the said sum, at an interest of 12 per cent per annum to
the defendant
3. That the plaintiff lent and advanced the said amount of Rs. 15000 to the defendant on or about the
15th day of May 1984, and the defendant on the same day as and in way of collateral security
executed a promissory note for the said amount of Rs. 15000 at an interest of 12 per cent per annum
in favour of the plaintiff. A copy of the said promissory note is annexed hereto and is marked as
'Exhibit A' to the plaint
4. That the plaintiff several times demanded the repayment of the said amount of Rs. 15000 together
with the interest from the defendant but the defendant failed to repay the said amount together with
interest on one pretext or the other.
5. That the plaintiff finally called upon the defendant through his advocate's letter dated April 8, 1987
for the repayment of Rs. 21000 (Rs. 15000 the principal sum and Rs. 6000 interest thereon at 12 per
cent per annum from 15.5.1987), but the defendant failed and neglected to return the said amount to
the plaintiff and moreover he did not reply the plaintiffs advocate's said letter. A copy of the said
letter is annexed hereto and is marked as "Exhibit B" to the plaint.
6. That the plaintiff submits that the said amount of Rs. 15,000 was lent and advanced by the plaintiff
to the defendant at Nasik where the defendant executed the promissory note in favour of the
plaintiff, and the amount of Rs. 21,000 (Rs. 15,000 the principal sum and Rs. 6,000 interest thereon)
is due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. The plaintiff and the defendant reside in Nasik
and the defendant usually works for gain at Nasik; thus the whole cause of action has arisen within
the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court and, therefore, this Court has got jurisdiction to try and
entertain this suit.
7. That the plaintiff values the suit at Rs. 21000 for the purposes of jurisdictionand the Court fees.
8. The plaintiff, therefore, prays that:
(a) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a decree of Rs. 21000 (Rs. 15000 the principal amount
and Rs. 6000 interest thereon from 15.5.84 to 30.4.87) against the defendant and in favour of the
plaintiff.
 (b) The defendant be ordered to pay interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the decretal amount
from the day of the institution of the suit until the satisfaction of the decretal mount
(c) The defendant may be ordered to pay the costs of the suit. Plaint drawn

Sd/- sd/-
Plantiffs Advocate

I, A son of B,theabovenamed plaintiff, do hereby declare and state that the contents of paras 1 to
5 of the plaint are true to my own knowledge and the contents of remaining paras of the plaint are based
on information received from my advocate and I believe the same to be true. Solemnly affirmed as
aforesaid at Nasik.This 14th day of May 1987.Interpreted and Identified by the

Sd/- sd/-
Advocate for the plaintiff
Before me Sd/-

Oath Commissioner.
List Of Documents

1. Exhibit A
2. Exhibit B
Written statement as and when it is ordered to be submitted by the defendant, the Court
may pronounce judgment against him, or grant further time, or make such other order in relation to the
suit as it deems fit under Order 8, rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2
Documents and Forum
1. List of documents (if he relies on certain documents in his
possession or power).1
2. Form of address.2
3. Power of attorney, (if the written statement is filed through the
Counsel).
 A specimen form of written statement on the basis of hypothetical facts in plaint in a suit for recovery
of money due on a promissory note is as under:
Form of Written Statement of Plaint in Money Suit

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION, NASIK S. Suit No. 37 of 1987
A, son of B, aged about 50 years, occupation business,residing
at 7 Green Park, Nasik .Plaintiff
VERSUS
C, son of D, aged about 40 years, occupation service,residing at 5 College Street, Nasik
..Defendant

Written Statement of the Defendant

1. With reference to the contents of para 1 of the plaint, the defendant admits that the plaintiff is a
money-lender, and hasbeen carrying on the business of money- lending; but the defendant denies that
the plaintiff has got any licence for the business of money lending. The defendant puts the plaintiff to
the strict proof that the plaintiff has got money-lending-licence. The rest of the contents of para 1 of
the plaint are correct and admitted by the defendant.
2. With reference to the contents of para 2 of the plaint, the defendant denies that he approached the
plaintiff on or about the 15th day of May 1984 or on any other date earlier or later for a sum of Rs.
15000 or any part thereof as alleged in the plaint. The defendant, further, denies that he ever needed a
sum of Rs. 15,000 or any part thereof for the purchases of a plot of land in the suburbs of the city.
Further, the defendant denies that the plaintiff ever agreed to lend and advance a sum of Rs. 15,000 or
any part thereof at an interest of 12 per cent per annum to the defendant as alleged in the plaint
3. With reference to the contents of para 3 of the plaint, the defendant denies that the plaintiff has,
actually lent and advanced the said amount of Rs. 15,000 or any part thereof to the defendant on or
about the 15th day of May 1984, or on any other subsequent date. The defendant, further, denies that
he executed a promissory-note and/ or pronote and/or receipt for the said amount of Rs. 15000 or any
part thereof at an interest of 12 per cent in favour of the plaintiff on or about the 15th day of May 1984
oron any subsequent date. The defendant submits that he took a friendly loan of Rs. 500 (Five
hundred) only from the plaintiff in the year 1982 and for the repayment of the said amount the
plaintiff obtained the signature of the defendant on a blank piece of paper which has maliciously and
dishonestly been converted into promissory note of Rs. 15000 by the plaintiff. The defendant submits
that the friendly loan of Rs. 500 has already been returned to the plaintiff during the year 1982. The
defendant further submits that while the defendant was returning the said amount of Rs. 500 to the
plaintiff he demanded of and from the plaintiff to return the defendant's signature taken on a blank
piece of paper, the plaintiff stated that he was not aware of any such signature, and if at all, was not in
the custody and possession of the plaintiff.
4. The defendant denies the contents of para 4 of the plaint The defendant says that the defendant is
neither liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of Rs. 15000 and interest thereon nor any part thereof.
The question that the defendant failed to return the amount of Rs. 15,000 and its interest to the
plaintiff on one pretext or the other does not arise.
5. With reference to para 5 of the plaint, the defendant denies the contents thereof and says that the
plaintiffs advocate's letter dated April 15, 1987 has been replied by the defendant through his
 advocate's letter dated April 25, 1987; and a copy of the said letter is annexed hereto and is marked as
"Exhibit A" to the written statement.
6. With reference to para 6 of the plaint, the defendant denies that the plaintiff lent and advanced the
said amount of Rs. 15000 or any part thereof to the defendant at Nasik or at any other place and the
defendant executed a promissory note and/or receipt thereof in favour of the plaintiff at Nasik or at
any other place or places. The defendant, further, denies that the amount of Rs. 21000 (Rs. 15000 the
principal amount and Rs. 6000 interest thereon) or any part thereof is due and payable by (he
defendant to the plaintiff.
7. In the aforesaid circumstances, the defendant submits that no cause of action has accrued to the
plaintiff against the defendant; and thus the plaintiffs suit is false, frivolous and unfounded and is
liable to be dismissed with costs.

Written statement drawn by

sd/- Sd/-
Defendant's Advocate Dependent

I, C son of D, the abovenamed defendant to hereby solemnly state and declare that the
contents of paras 1 to 7 of the written statement are true to my own knowledge. Solemnly affirmed as
aforesaid at Nasik.This 15th day of My 1987 Interpreted and identified by me.

sd/-
Advocate for the defendant
Before me sd/-
sd/- Defendant
(Oath Commissioner)

List of Document
Exhibit "A".
 INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS:

MN, Managing agents of Ambala Textiles, Ambala, have filed a suit against XY, a polish refugee
for breach of contract claiming Rs. 50,000 as damages. The contract is writing, properly stamped, signed
by both the parties to the contract. Before filing the suit MN had by their Advocates letter called upon
XY to carry out his part of the contract or in the alternative to pay Rs. 50,000 by way of damages for the
breach of contract XY has failed and neglected to carry out his part of the contract of to pay the damages
asked for or any amount. He even did not care to send a reply to MNs advocates letter. MN have,
recently,, learnt that XY with intent to delay the execution of any decree that may be passed against him
has disposed of part of his property and has removed the rest of it from the local limits of the jurisdiction
of the Court and is about to leave India for good. MN Instruct you to present an application to the Court
for the arrest of XY before judgment. Draft an application for them.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR SUB-JUDGE, AMBALA

Appn. No.. of 1987
In
Civil Suit No. 295 of 1986
MN, Managing agents of
Ambala Textile, AmbalaPlaintiff/Applicant
V.
XY, a Polish Refugee
Residing at 9, Punjabi
Colony, Ambala..Defendant /Opponent

Application under O. 38, r. 1, C.P.C.

The abovenamed plaintiff states as under that:
1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for breach of contract claiming Rs. 50,000 as damages from the
defendant. The contract is in writing properly stamped signed by both the parties to the contract,
i.e., the plaintiff and the defendant.
2. Before the filing of the suit, the plaintiff had by his advocates letter
dated.called upon the defendant to carry out his part of the contract or in the
alternative to pay Rs. 50,000 by way of damages for the breach of contract. The defendant did not
care reply to the letter of the plaintiffs advocate.
3. The plaintiffs have recently learnt from a friend of the defendant that the defendant with intent to
delay the execution of the decree that may be passed against him, has disposed of part of his
property.
4. The defendant has removed the rest of his property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the
Court.
5. The defendant was served with a summons on 15th of Jan., 1986. He has wound up his business
and has made arrangements for passport and passage after the service of summons to leave the
Limits of India permanently.
6. The defendant is Polish refugee and in all probabilities he might not return to India once he leaves
her shore.
7. The plaintiff reasonably apprehends that he is likely to be defeated or delayed in the execution of
the decree that may be passed against the defendant. The plaintiff has filed his affidavit in support
of his application.
8. The plaintiff, therefore, prays that:
(a) The Honble Court may be pleased to order the arrest of the defendant before judgment, and
brought to the Court.
(b) The defendant may further be ordered either to deposit the money in the Court or to furnished
security or be kept in prison until he furnishes security.

Sd/- Sd/-
Plaintiffs Advocate Plaintiff
Note: File affidavit along with the application in support of it.

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 95 CPC.(arrest on sufficient gronds)

IN THE COURT OF .
Suit No. 200
In the Matter of:-
AB Plaintiff
Versus
CD Defendant
Most Respectfully Showeth:-
1. The plaintiff had filed an application under Order 39 rule 1 CPC before this Honble Court.
This Honable Court was pleased to issue a warrant of arrest against the defendant.
2. That pursuant to the order of this Honable Court the defendant was arrested on
and he could obtain release only on payment of amount of Rs.
.as mentioned in the warrant of arrest.
3. That it is submitted that the plaintiff had obtained warrant of arrest on the ground that the
defendant had absconded and left the local limits of jurisdiction of this Honable Court.
4. That it is submitted that the defendant had neither absconded nor left the local limits of the
jurisdiction of this Honable Court.
5. That on account of obtaining wrongful arrest by the plaintiff the defendant had suffered loss
as under:-
(Mentioned the loss suffered)

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that the applicant be awarded compensation of

Rs for the injury caused on account of obtaining wrongful arrest by the
plaintiff.
It is therefore prayed accordingly.
Applicant
Through
Advocate
Place :
Dated : ...
 Attachment before judgment
A file a suit against B for the recovery of a loan of Rs. 25,000. Pleading the suit A learns that B is
about to dispose of his property. A, therefore, wants to apply for an attachment before judgment. Draft
the necessary application presuming all the all over necessary details yourself. Let us presume that the
suit has been filed in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nasik.
IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (S.D.), NASIK
Application No..of 1987
In
Civil suit No. 175 of 1986
A.. Plaintiff/Applicant
B.. Defendant/Opposite Party

Application under O. 38, r. 5, C.P.S.

The plaintiff abovenemed submits by his application as under that:
1. The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for the recovery of Rs. 18,000 and the defendant has
been served with the summons of this suit.
2. The defendant owns a house at. (give the details of the District, Taluka and the town where the house
is situated). The defendant also owns a car (give here the details of the make, No. and the registration No.,
office etc.).
3. The defendant has not got any other property except the house and the car mentioned above.
4. The defendant has given an advertisement in the local newspaper for the sale of the said house and the car
after summons of the suit has been served on him. A copy of the newspaper-advertisement is annexed
hereto and is marked as Appendix A to the application.
5. The defendant is also negotiating with a number of brokers and customers about the sale of his movable
and immovable property.
6. The defendant is about to dispose of his movable and immovable property with intent to obstruct or delay
the execution of the decree that may be passed against him in this suit.
7. The plaintiff will not be able to recovery his decretal dues if the defendant dispose of the property referred
to above during the pendency of the suit.
8. The plaintiff has filed his own affidavit and the affidavits of the brokers and the intending
customersalongwith this application.
9. The plaintiff, therefore, prays that---
(a) The Honable Court may be pleased to direct the defendant to furnished security of Rs. 18,000, and
filling which,
(b) The Honable Court may be pleased to order conditional attachment of the defendants property (give
specific property).

Sd/- Sd/-
Plaintiffs Advocate Plaintiff.

Note: Appendix A support this application by attaching copies of affidavits as stated in the application.
 Injunctions:

Exercise
A and B are owners of adjacent house. As house is higher than that of B. Through a window in a
room on the upper storey on his house A has enjoyed, without interruption, light and air for 30 years
peaceable as an easement. B starts to raise his house. A apprehends that the light and air enjoyed by him
through the window will be cut off, if B allowed to raise his house. A files a suit against B claiming a
right of easement of light and air through the window and an injunction restraining B from raising his
house or interfering with his right to light and air in any other manner. A wants to apply for an interim
injunction against B pending the suit, draft the necessary application on behalf of A.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR SUB-JUDGE, KARNAL

Application No.. of 1987
In
Civil suit No. 286 of 1987
A Plaintiff/Applicant
V
B Defendant/Opponent
Application Under O. 39, rr. 1-2, C.P.C.
The abovenamed plaintiff submits as under that:
(1) The above plaintiff has filed the above suit for mandatory injunction against the defendant
claiming a right of easement of light and light peaceably enjoyed for a continuous period of 30
years and more through the window on the western side plaintiff house.
(2) The defendant is contemplating to erect a wall on the western side of house belonging to the
plaintiff and obstruct the light and air peaceably enjoyed by the plaintiff continuously for the last
30 years and more.
(3) The plaintiff is likely to be put to an irreparable loss by the erection of the wall by the defendant.
It is therefore in the interest of justice that the defendant may be restrained from commiting the
contemplated injury to the plaintiff and the status quo should be maintained during the pendency
of the suit.
(4) The plaintiff has filed the necessary affidavits of his neighbors and his own swearing that
plaintiff has enjoyed the right of light and air for 30 years without any interruption from the
windows in the room on the western side of the upper storey of his house.
(5) The plaintiff therefore prays that the defendant may be restrained by and order of this Honble
Court from erecting any wall on the western side of the plaintiffs house during the pendency of
this suit.

Sd. Sd
Plaintiffs Advocate Plaintiff

Note: Support this application by filling necessary affidavits along with it.
 Let us draft an application for the appointment of a Court receiver on the following facts:
P mortgages his house at Karnal to Q for Rs. 16,000. O does not pay the interest thereon
regularly. Q files a suit to enforce mortgage. Q also desires that the Court should appoint a Receiver to
take possession of the house mortgaged during the pendency of the suit.

Application for appointment of Receiver

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR SUBODINATE JUDGE, AMBALA

Application Noof 1987
In
Civil suit No. 295 of 1987
Q Plaintiff/Applicant
V.
P Defendant/Opponent

Application under O. 40, rr. 1-2

The abovenamed plaintiff submits as under:

1. That the plaintiff has filed the above suit against the defendant to enforce the mortgage and for foreclosure
and sale of the house of the defendant mortgaged to the plaintiff.
2. That the defendant is not keeping the mortgaged-property in a tenantable condition and has caused
damage to the said property by neglecting to carry not huge repairs.
3. That the defendant is collecting advance rents from the tenants to put the present plaintiff to substantial
loss.
4. That the plaintiff apprehends that he will not be in a position to recover his dues of Rs. 16,000 with cost
and interest on the sale of the mortgaged-property.
5. It is, therefore, just and convenient to appoint a receiver of the mortgaged-property with direction to take
possession and to collect rents from the tenants during the pendency of this suit.
6. The plaintiff therefore prays that a fit and proper person may be appointed as a receiver of the house
described in the plaint and he may be ordered to take possession of the said house from the defendant and
collect rents from the tenants during the pendency of the suit. The Court may pleased to issue such further
and other direction as it may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.
This 7th day of December, 1987

Sd/- Sd/-
Plaintiffs Advocate Plaintiff

APPLICATION FOR SECURITY OF COSTS

The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of certain immovable property and his suit was dismissed with
costs. The taxes costs came to Rs. 753. The defendant took out execution proceedings to recover his
Costs, but got nothing. The plaintiff has filed an appeal against the order of the trial Court; the appeal has
been admitted and his notice has been served upon the defendant as respondent. He engages you on his
behalf and instruct you to apply for security of costs, both of the appeal and the suit. His instruct ions are
that the appeal is frivolous and not at all likely to succeed; and secondly, the appellant is not the real
appellant, but is a tool in the hands of other people who are inimical to the respondent. His further
instructions are that he could not recover his costs no because judgment-debtor had no means to pay but
because he wanted to avoid payment through he is a man of means. Draft an application on the above and
some other facts that may strike you. It is presumed that the suit and the appeal has been filed in the
District Court at Karnal by AB against XY.

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE AT KARNAL

Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Misc. Appn. No if 198
In Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1988
Applicant
XY (Orig.
Defendant)
V.
Opponent
AB ...(Orig.
Plaintiff)

Application for security of costs under O. 25, r. 1, C.P.C.

The applicant humbly states as under that:
1. The Opponent has filed an appeal before the Honble Court to while away time and to harass the
present.
2. The said appeal is frivolous and the opponent is not likely to succeed therein.
3. The applicant is instigated by some person who are on inimical terms with the applicant and the
opponent had filed appeal at their instance only.
4. The applicant could not recover his costs of the lower Court from the opponent though execution
proceedings were taken against him to recover the same.
5. The opponent avoided payment of costs of the Lower Court though he is a man of means.
The applicant therefore most humbly prays that the opponent may be ordered to furnish security
for the payment of all costs incurred and kindly to be incurred by the applicant in both the appeal
and original suit.
Sd/- Sd/-
Applicants Advocate Applicant

Notes: Support this application by the affidavits of the applicant.

Application for issue of Commission

Exercise
X has a suit Y in Ahmedabad for recovery of specific movable properties and a sum of Rupees
Fifteen Thousand In cash. Z is an important and material witness who could to his own personal
knowledge depose to certain events relevant in the suit. Z resides, and carries on business and
works for gain in Calcutta. X therefore desires a commission to be issued to examine Z. Draft the
necessary application on behalf of X.
 IN THE CIVIL COURT AT AHMEDABAD
Appn. No..of 1988
In
Civil suit No. 389 of 1987
X.. Plaintiff/Applicant
v.
Y. Defendant/Opponent

Application under O. 26 r. 4(2), C.P.C.

The humble petition of the above named plaintiff is as under:

1. The plaintiff has filed, the present suit for the recovery of some ornaments and a sum of Rs.
15,000 from the defendants, and the said suit fixed for hearing on 14th of March, 1988.
2. Z is an important and material witness in this case, as he knows certain matter and events
relevant in the suit. He was in the company of the plaintiff and defendant for a number of
months when material incident in the present suit took place.
3. The said witness Z however resides and carries on business at Calcutta since the last four
months and more, beyond the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court. It is, therefore, in
the interest of justice that Z be examined on commission at Calcutta.
4. The plaintiff, therefore, prays that a commission may kindly be issued to the Principal Judge
of the City Civil Court at Calcutta for examining Z on commission.
5. The plaintiff has filed his affidavit along with this application and is ready to deposit in the
Court the necessary expenses of commission as ordered by the Honable Court.
This day of February 1988 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/-
Plaintiff Advocate Plaintiff

Note: File affidavits of the applicant in support of this Application.

Application for setting Aside Ex-parte Decree

Exercise
A has filed a suit against B to recover Rs. 5,000 due on a promissory in the Court of Sub-judge at
Ambala. Due to sudden dislocation of the railway service B failed to attend the Court at time of hearing
and decree is passed against him. B briefs you to male an application to the Court for setting aside
ex-parte decree, draft the application.

IN THE COURT OF SUB-JUDGE, AMBLA

Misc. Appl. No..1978
In
Suit No. 555 of 1987
B. Application (Original
Deft).
v.
A.. Opponent (Opponent (Original
Plaintiff).
Application under O. 9, r 13, C.P.C.
The above-named applicant submits as under:
1. That the opponent had filed a civil suit No. 555 of 1987 for the recovery of Rs. 5,000 due on a
pronote against the present applicant.
2. That the said was fixed for hearing on 3rd March, 1988 before his Honble Court. The applicant
knew that the date was fixed for the hearing of the suit and the applicant went to Shahabad
Station at 9.30 a.m. to catch the train. But all were detained for two and a half hours on account of
accidents at different places. The road traffic almost remained suspended for about two hours due
to heavy rains.
3. Naturally the applicant was late in coming to the Court in view of the accidents and heavy rains.
The said suit was taken up for hearing in the absence of the applicant at 12.30 on the aforesaid
date and was decided in his absence with an ex-parte decree against the applicant.
4. The applicant, thus, was prevented from appearing in the Court when the suit was called on for
hearing by a sufficient cause. The applicant has filed his affidavits in support of this application.
5. The applicant therefore, respectfully, prays:
(a) That the ex-parte passed against the applicant (defendant) may kindly be set aside and the
original suit No. 555 of 1987 may be restored on the file of the Honble Court and may be
heard on merits.
(b) That pending the hearing and final disposal of this application the opponent may be
restrained be an order of the Court from executing the ex-parte decree against the applicant
(defendant).

Dated this.. day of March 1988 at Ambala

Sd/- Sd/-
Plaintiff Advocate Plaintiff

Note: Support this application by the plaintiffs affidavits.

Petition to appoint Guardian as litem
(From No. 27, Part II, Bombay High Court, O.S. Rules)

IN THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Application No.19.
(Under its Ordinary Original Civil jurisdiction)
In the matter of.a minor and in the matter of a suit wherein..is plaintiff and
is a defendant.

To
The honourable Chief Justice and his Companion Judges of High Court,
The petitioner,Son of ., most respectfully sheweth:
1. Thatis desirous of bringing a suit in this honourable Court against
2. That..is a minor under the age of.
3. That is the testamentary or natural guardian of the said minor.
4. That the said minor resides with
5. That your petitioner has by letter dated served on..requested..to
consent to act as guardian for the suit of the said minor.
6. That hereinto annexed is his consent in writing.
Or
That the said .has neglected or refused to give such consent (state reason if any)
but that has by the consent hereto annexed signified his willingness to act as such guardian.
7. That the said has no interest directly or indirectly adverse to such minor.
8. That he is otherwise a fit and proper person to be appointed as a guardian.
9. The petitioner therefore, prays that the said Sri.. or some other fit and proper
person be appointed guardian for the suit of the said minor defendant.

Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner

Note: Support this application with affidavit.

A specimen form of petition by a wife against her husband for restitution of conjugal right on
hypothetical facts is as under:

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, KURUKSHETRA

M.J. Petition No1988
Ms. Subhadra, wife of Shri Govind
Rana, aged about 25 years, occupation
Household, residing atKurukshetra.. .Petitioner
v.
Shri Govind Rana son of Shri Ram
Chandra Rana, aged about 30 years,
Occupation, service, residing at
Pehowa, Kurukshetra. ..Responded

Petitioner under S. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

The above-named petitioner most respectfully showeth:
1. That the petitioner and the respondent were lawfully married according to Hindu Vedic Rites
on the 15th day of March, 1985 at Kurukshetra.
2. That their marriage was not registered under any law.
3. That the petitioner and the respondent were Hindus before their marriage and are Hindus
after the marriage. Both the petitioner and the respondent are domicile of Haryana.
4. That the petitioner and the respondent cohabited and lived together in H. No. 320,
Kurukshetra, for about 2 years, and they last resided together in this very house.
5. That the petitioner and respondent gave no issue of their marriage.
6. That the respondent has been neglecting and refusing the petitioner and his society to cohabit
with the petitioner without just cause for the last about two years. (Give few instances of
neglect or refusal as under). The respondent drove away the petitioner several times back to
her parents whenever she went to reside and cohabit with the respondent on trifling issues.
7. That for the last two years the respondent has, without just cause, completely withdraw from
the society of the petitioner and refuse to cohabit with the petitioner or to look after or
maintain her.
8. The since then the petitioner has been living at her fathers place at Kurukshetra and is ready
and willing to cohabit with the respondent. The petitioner is sincerely faithful to the
respondent alone as devoted wife.
9. That there has been no proceedings of any kind in respect of this marriage between the
petitioner and the respondent in any Court in India before this petition.
10. That there has been no collusion between the respondent and the petitioner regarding this
petition.
11. That the cause of action accrued to the petitioner within the Jurisdiction of this Court and the
petition is filed without delay.
 12. That the parties were married as well as last reside together at Kurukshetra which is situated
within the territorial limits of the ordinary original matrimonial jurisdiction of this Court and
therefore it has jurisdiction to try and certain this petition.
13. The petitioner has affixed the requisite Court fee stamp on this petition of the purpose and
Court-fees.
14. The petitioner, therefore, prays that:
(a) The Honble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to libe with the petitioner and
to allow the petitioner a free exercise of her conjugal rights with the respondent.
(b) The costs of the proceedings may be awarded.
(c) Any other relief which is proper in the interest of justice may also be granted.

Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner
I, Mrs. Subhadra wife of Shri Govind Rana, residing as above do hereby solemnly
affirm and verified that the contests of paras 1 to 2 of this petition are true to my own
knowledge and belief. The remaining paras are based in information received and I believed
the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed as aforesaid at Kurukshetra
This 15th day of Jan., 1988 Sd/-
Interpreted and Identification by me. Petitioner.
Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate
Before me
(Oath Commissioner)

Petition for Judicial Separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE.

Petition No. of 19..
P. Petitioner.
v.
R.. Respondent
Petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The Petitioner above-named states as follows:

1. That the petitioner was married to the respondent on the .. day of .198 according
to Hindu vedic rites at The said marriage has not been registered with the Registrar of
Marriages.
2. That before and after the marriage the petitioner and the respondent were and are Hindis by religion and
are domicile of Maharashtra.
3. That before the marriage, the petitioner was a spinster aged about 22 years, and the respondent was a
bachelor aged about 25 years.
4. That since the solemnization of the said marriage and upto.. day.1987, the petitioner and
the respondent lived and cohabited together was wife and husband at.
5. That by the said marriage the petitioner and the respondent have had one son named aged about
two years. The said son lives with the petitioner.
6. That since the day of..1987, the respondent has on several occasions abused the petitioner
in the presence of the petitioners father and the respondent expelled the petitioner from the marital home
on the ..day of .. 1987 and since then the petitioner has been residing with her parents
at The petitioner did her best to live and cohabit with the respondent, but the respondent is not
talking the petitioner to the marital home.
7. That since the ..day of ..1987 the respondent gas deserted the petitioner without any reasonable
cause and since then the respondent has been living at separately even from his parents.
8. That the respondent is having the relation of sexual intercourse with of and the petitioner has
come to know of the same on the . Day of .1987 from several women of the locality. The
petitioner craves leave of the Honourable Court to refer to and rely upon their oral evidence whenever
necessary. The petitioner has not in any manner been accessory to or connived at, or condoned such act of
the respondent.
9. The respondent mischievously and maliciously charged the petitioner of committing adultery, abused her
in different way and treated her with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the
petitioner that it will be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the respondent.
10. That there is no collusion with the respondent in presenting this petitioner. The petition is being filed
without any necessary or improper delay.
11. That the said marriage was solemnized at. And the petitioner and the respondent have been
residing at.. which is situated within the ordinary local limits of this Court,
therefore, this Honble Court has got jurisdiction to try and entertain this petition.
12. That the national value of the petition is Rs..; and the Court fees stamp of the fixed
amount has been affix hereon for the purpose of jurisdiction and Court fees.
The petitioner, therefore, prays that:
(a) That Honable Court may be pleased to passed to pass a decree of judicial separation on favour of the
petitioner and against the respondent.
(b) The Honble Court may be pleased to grant the maintenance pendent lite at the rate of Rs. 500 p/m in
favour of the petitioner.
(c) The respondent by ordered to pay the costs of this petition to the petitioner.
Petition drawn by Sd/-
Sd/- Petitioner
Petitioners Advocate.
I,.. the above-named petitioner residing as above, do hereby solemnly state and
declare that the contents of paras 1 to 10 of this petition are true to my own knowledge; and the
contents of the remaining paras are based on information received from my advocate and I believe the
same to be true. I say that nothing has been concealed and/or suppressed.
Thisday of ..1987 Sd/-
Interpreted and identified by Petitioner
Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate
Before me
Sd/-
(Oath Commissioner)
 (Respondents Written Statement)
IN THE COURT DISTRICT JUDGE
M.J. Petition No. 21 of 198
P. ..Petitioner
V
R.
.Respondent
Written statement of the Respondent is as follows that:
1. The respondent admits the contents of para No. 1 of the petition.
2. The respondent admits the contents of para No. 2 of the petition.
3. The respondent admits the contents of paraNo. 4 of the petition.
4. The respondent denies the contents of para No. 5 of the petition. The respondent submits that
the respondent is not a mannerless or ill-tempered woman rather, she is a well-cultured,
co-operative, social and well-educated woman. She has very good relations with the petitioner
and her in-laws. She gives ample regard to the petitioner in the presence or absence of
petitioners friends. She, further, submits that she has never thrown a bottle or any other things
at the petitioner while alone or in the presence of his friends.
5. With reference to the contents of para 6, the respondent denies that she is a characterless
woman. She also denies that on 15-12-1986 or on any other date the petitioner has been found
and seen by the respondent in a compromising position with a stranger. The respondent submits
that she bears a good moral character, and is sincerely devoted and faithful to the petitioner
alone.
6. The respondent admits the contents of para 7 of the petition.
7. The respondent admits the contents of para No. 8 of the petition.
8. The respondent, therefore, prays that the allegations made against that respondent in the
petition are baseless, vexatious and frivolous, and hence not correct. The petition is liable to be
dismissed with costs.

Sd/-
Responde
nt
Written Statement drawn by
Sd/-
Respondents Advocate

I, the respondent, abovenamed do hereby solemnly state and declare that the
contents of para 1 to para 6 are true to my knowledge and the contents of remaining paras are
based on information supplied to me and I believe the same to be true.
Sd/-
Respondent
Solemnly affirmed as aforesaid at.
This..day of .198.
Before me
(Oath Commissioner)
 Christian Wifes Petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of the husbands
adultery.
IN THE CITY COURT AT AHEMDABAD
M.J. Petition No. of 19
ABC etc., Christian adult, residing
atAhemdabad, occupation..
..Petitioner
XYZ etc., Christian adult, residing
at..Ahemdabad, occupation.
..Respondent
And
PQR etc., Christian adult, residing
at..Ahemadabad, occupation.
..Co-Respondent
Petition for dissolution of Marriage
under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act.
To,
The Honble Principal Judge
And other Judges of this Honble Court.
The humble Petition of the Petitioner abovenamed
Most respectfully showeth:
1. On 1st April, 19 the Respondent was lawfully married to the petitioner, then Mary Josefine
DSouza, a spinster, at St. Marys Church, Ahemdabad, according to traditional Christian rites.
2. After the said marriage, the Respondent lived and co-habited with the Petitioner at.
Ahemdabad, from the date of the marriage, namely 1st April, 19. Until 15th July, 19.
3. Thereafter, i.e., from 15th July, 19. The Petitioner and the respondent shifted to their new
matrimonial home at.. Ahemdabad.
4. On or about 1st November, 19. The Respondent employed the Co-Respondent as domestic
servant in the full-time employment of the Respondent.
5. During the last three years immediately preceding the date of this Petition, namely 10th
February, 19 the Co-Respondent was constantly residing in the matrimonial home of the
Petitioner and the Respondent, and on diverse occasions during the said period, the dates of
which are unknown to the Petitioner, the Respondent committed adultery with the
Co-Respondent.
6. The Petitioner and the Respondent have no issue of the said marriage.
7. At the time of the said marriage, the Petitioner and the Respondent were Christians and
continue to be so.
8. There is no collusion or connivance between the petitioner and the Respondent in filing this
Petition, and the Petitioner has not, in any manner whatsoever, condoned the said adultery.
9. The Petitioner and the Respondent were married in Ahemdabad and last Co-habited in
Ahemdabad at which is within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of this Court and
therefore this Honble Court has jurisdiction to certain, try and dispose of this petition.
10. The Petitioner has paid the fixed Court-fees of Rs..on this Petition.
11. The Petitioner will rely on documents, a list whereof is annexed hereto.
The Petitioner therefore prays:
(a) That this Honble Court may be pleased to decree a dissolution of the said marriage
between the Petitioner and the Respondent.
(b) That this Honble Court be pleased to direct the Co-Respondent to pay to the Petitioner, a
sum of Rs. 5,000 as damges by reason of her having committed adultery with the
Petitioners husband.
(c) That the Respondent and the Co-Respondent be ordered and decree to pay to the Petitioner
the costs of this Petition; and
(d) For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may parmits.

Petition drawn by Sd/-

Sd/- Petitioner
Advocate for Petitioners

Usual Verification etc.

Joint Petition for Divorce by Mutual Consent.

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, DELHI

M.J. Petition No..of 19..
A son of B, aged about 30 years,
Residing at Delhi occupation..
And
X wife of A, aged about 28 years,
Residing at ..Delhi, occupation..
.Petitioners
Petition for the divorce by mutual consent under Section 28 of the Special
Marriage Act, 1954,
The Humble Petition of the Petitioners abovenamed:
1. That on 2nd May, 19.. the First Petitioner, a Hindu by religion, was lawfully married to
the Second Petitioner, a Christian by religion, under the provisions of the Special Marriage
Act, 1954, at Delhi. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit A is a copy of the Marriage
Certificate dated 2nd May, 19.. evidencing the said marriage between the Petitioners.
2. That after the said marriage, the Petitioners co-habited at the First Petitioners house.
However, within a year after the said marriage, constant quarrel and altercations began to
take place between the Petitioner; and ultimately, on or about the 10th day of April, 19 the
Second Petitioner left the First Petitioners home, and went to reside separately at
.Delhi, Where the Second Petitioner still continues to reside at on the date of this
petition. The Petitioners submits that in the circumstances the Petitioners have been living
separately for a period of more than one year.
3. That the Petitioners say and submits that they not been able to live together and they have
mutually agreed that their said marriage be dissolved by his Honble Court.
4. That there are no issues of the said marriage between the Petitioners.
5. That there is no collusion or connivance between the petitioners in the filing of the Petition.
6. That the Petitioners were married in Delhi and last cohabited in Delhi at..which is within
the territorial limits of this Court, therefore, this Honble Court has jurisdiction to entertain,
try and dispose of this petition.
7. No other proceedings with respect to the marriage between the Petitioners have been filed
in this Honble Court or in any other Court of India.
8. The petitioners have paid the fixed Court fees of Rs..on this Petition.
9. The Petitioners will rely on documents a list whereof annexed hereto:

The Petitioners, therefore, pray:

 (a) That this Honble Court be pleased to decree a dissolution of the marriage between the
Petitioners; and
(b) For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.

Petition drawn by Sd/- (A)

Sd/- Sd/- (X)
Advocate for Petitioners
Usual Verification etc.
List of documents.

FORM OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL

IN THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Under its civil appellate jurisdiction
Appeal No..of 1987
In
Suit No.37 of 1985 from the Court of Civil Judge, S.D., Nasik.
C,D. etc Appellant (Original Defendant)
v.
A,B. etc. Respondent (Original Plaintiff)
Appeal against judgement and decree passed by
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nasik on 11-3-1987
in Suit No. 37 of 1985.
The appellant most respectfully sheweth that:
1. The respondent has filed the Suit No. 37 of 1985 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior
division, Nasik, against the appellant for the recovery of Rs. 15,000 which sum the appellant
allegedly owed to the respondent against a promissory note executed by the appellant in
favour of the respondent.
2. The learned Judge heard the said suit and passed a decree for Rs. 20,000 against the
appellant on the 11th day of March, 1987.
3. The appellant being aggrieved by the said decree and judgment prefers this appeal
on the following amongst other grounds:
i) That the learner Judge erred in holding that the promissory note was legally
valid.
ii) That the promissory note was invalid and hence not enforceable against the
appellant.
iii) That no consideration has passed from the respondent to the appellant under the
promissory note.
iv) That the learned Judge erred in holding that the promissory note was executed
by the appellant.
v) That the hand-writing expert was not called in spite of the repeated request from
the appellant.
vi) That the learned Judge erred in not appreciating the evidence of the appellant
(defendant) and his witnesses.
vii) That the decision of the learned Judge is against the weight of evidence in the
case, and the learned Judge ought to have dismissed the plaintiffs suit.
viii) That the decision of the trail Court is against justice, equity and good conscience
and hence not sustainable.
4. The appellant has not filed any other appeal prior to this in the Honble Court.
 5. The appellant, therefore, submits that the Honourable Court be pleased to send for the
records of the suit from the trial Court and set aside the decree and the judgment of the trial
Court.
6. Pending the hearing and final disposal of this appeal, the respondent be restrained by an
order of the Honble Court from executing the aforesaid decree against both-person and
property of the appellant.
This 7th day of April, 1987 Advocate for the appellant.
At Bombay
Note: The memorandum of appeal can be signed by the advocate of the appellant if he
or she has got a power of attorney, i.e., Vakalanama from the appellant, otherwise the
appellant should sign the memorandum of appeal.
No decree is reversed or substantially varied nor any case is remanded in appeal on
account of any misjoinder of non-joinder of parties (but not necessary parties), or causes of
action or any error defect or irregularity in any proceedings in the suit, not affecting the
merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the Court (sec. 99). Likewise, no order is modified
or reversed on account of any error, defect or irregularity in any proceedings relating to
such order, unless such error, defect or irregularity has prejudicially affected the decision
of the case. (Sec. 99-A).

IN THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

(Under its revisional jurisdiction)
Civil Rev. Appn. No.....of 1987)
C,D. etc Appellant (Original Defendant)
v.
A,B. etc. Respondent (Original Plaintiff
The applicant above named submits as follows that:
1. The opposite party had instituted a suit bearing number 37 of 1985 in the Court of the
Senior Division, Civil Judge, Nasik. The Court decreed the said suit of the apposite party on
March 11, 1987 and ordered the applicant to pay the amount of the decree to the opposite party.
2. The applicant being aggrieved by the said decree and judgment prefers this application
on the following among other ground:
a. That the decree and judge passed by the learned judge is illegal and
inoperative.
b. That the learner Judge has erred in law by passing the said decree on a
promissory note which was not properly stamped.
c. That the learner Judge erred in law by not appreciating the petitioners
application for leave to produce a material document.
d. That in doing so, the learned Judge in the exercise of the jurisdiction has
acted with an illegality and a material irregularity.
e. The said judgment and decree is against justice, equity and good
conscience; and hence not sustainable in this Court.
 3. In the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant submits that the Honble Court be
pleased to call for the records of the trying Court and revise its judgment and decree
in the interest of justice.
Sd/-
Applicant
This.day of ..1987
At Bombay.
Sd/-
Advocate for the Applicant.

Application For stay execution

A files a suit against B for recovering possession of a garden land worth Rs. 8090
alleging that the property had been let out to B.B contends that he was the owner of the
property and that his possession was as owner and not as tenant. The Court of first instance
rejects the defence of B and passes a decree for possession of the property in execution. After
the filing of the appeal, B wants that the execution of the decree may be styled pending the
hearing of the appeal. Please draft an application for stay of execution. You are liberty to
choose the necessary details.

Interlocutory Applications

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, ALLAHABAD

Misc. Appn. No..1988
In
Civil Appeal No. 185 of 1988
B.. Appellant (Orig. Defendant)
A.. Respondent (Orig. plaintiff)
This humble petition of the above-named appellant is an under that:
1. The applicant has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Civil
Judge, Allahabad in Civil Suit No. 332 of 1985. The trail Court has ordered the appellant to
hand over the possession of the garden land to the respondent.
2. The respondent has been declared the owner of the property in the suit by the
lower Court.
3. The respondent has filed an application for execution of the decree of the Lower
Court (Darkhast No. 27 of 1988) in the Court of the Civil Judge, and is attempting to take
possession of the garden land in dispute. The present appellant will be put to an irreparable loss
is the respondent takes possession of the garden land as the appellant has spent a very large
amount for the improvement of the garden and has planted valuable fruit and flower giving
trees very recently.
 4. The appellant is prepared to furnish security to the satisfaction of the Court for
the due performance of the decree that may be ultimately passed, as his Honble Court or the
trail Court orders him to furnish.
5. The appellant, therefore, prays that the execution of the decree in Civil Suit No.
332 of 1985 be stayed until the hearing and final disposal of this appeal.
Dated this .......day of 1988

Sd/- Sd/-
Appellant Advocate Appellant

Petition for the appointment of a Guardian of the Person and Property of a Minor
IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Appn. No.. of 19
Petition for appointment of a guardian of the person and property of A B, etc., a
minor residing at
The humble petition of the Petitioner Ram Niwas most respectfully sheweth:
1. That the abovename A.B. is a minor of the age of 16 years, having been born
on or about the day of ... The said minor is a male, Hindu by religion, and ordinarily
resides at. With his material uncle.
2. That the said minor is absolutely entitled to the movable and immovable
properties, set out in the Schedule A annexed hereto, which are approximately of the value of
Rs..
3. That the said properties are at present in the possession of..
4. That the said A.B. is at present in the custody of.
5. That the only relations of the minor, now living are:
(a) This petitioner, the material uncle of the minor residing at..
(b) E.F., his sister, and the maternal uncle of the minor residing at
6. That no guardian of the person and/or of the property of the minor has been
appointed by Court, and no application has at any time been made to this or to any other Court
with respect to the guardianship of the person and/or property of the minor (or late Shri PQ was
appointed-guardian of the person and property of the minor who died on or about the .. day
of . Since the death of the late Shri PQ no other application except this has been made to
this or to any other Court with respect to the guardianship of the person and/or property of the
said minor).
7. That is application is for the appoi8ntmet of the guardian of the person and
property of the said minor.
8. That L.M., the father of the minor died intestate on or about the . day of ..
(or, is a person of unsound mind or incapable of managing his own affairs, or as the case may
be).
9. That the petitioner in the maternal uncle of the minor and the said minor is under
his care, custody and protection. The petitioner is married and has four children, and resides
with his family at.. He is of good business habit and is a fit and proper person to be
appointed guardian of the person and property of the said minor, A.B.
10. That suitable provision ought to be made for the education and maintenance of
the said minor and for the management of his properties. Item Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of Schedule
hereto are in a dilapidated condition and need repair, and unless they are at once repaired, will
seriously deteriorate in value.
11. The petitioner, therefore, humbly prays for an order that the petitioner may be
appointed guardian of the person and property of the said minor upon such terms as may be
deemed just and proper by the Honble Court.
Interlocutory Applications
Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner
Schedule A
Note: Support this application by the affidavit of the petitioner.

(e) Petition to appoint Guardian ad litem

(Form No. 27, Part II, Bombay High Court, O.S. Rules)
IN THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Application No...19..
(Under its Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction).
In the matter of.... a minor and in the matter of a suit wherein.. is plaintiff
and.. is a defendant.
To
The Honourable Chief Justice and his Companion Judge of the High Court,
The petitioner.. son of, most respectfully sheweth:
1. That..is desirous of bringing a suit in this honourable Court against
2. That .. is a minor under the age of
3. That .. is the testamentary or natural guardian of the said minor,
4. That the said minor resides with..
5. That your petitioner has by letter dated .. served on requested . To
consent to act as guardian for the suit of the said minor.
6. That hereinto annexed is his consent in writing.
Or
That the said has neglected or refused to give such consent (state reason if
any) but that has by the consent hereto annexed signified his willingness to act as which
guardian.
7. That the said has no interest directly or indirectly adverse to such minor.
8. That he is otherwise a fit and proper person to be appointed as a guardian.
9. The petitioner therefore, prays that the said Sri or some other fit and
proper person be appointed guardian for the suit of the said minor defendant.

Sd/- Sd/-

Petitioners Advocate Petitioner

Note: Support this application with affidavit.
 Review
Section 114 and Order 47 of the CP. Code lay down the procedure for a review of a
decree or order. An application for a review of a decree or an order is made to the Court which
has passed such decree or order or to his successor in office. Subject to the period of limitation
any person who is aggrieved by (a) a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed by this
Code, but has not been preferred, or (b) by a decree or order from which no appeal lies, or (c) by
a decision on a referencefr.om a Court of Small Causes, may apply for a review of the judgment
to the Court which passed. The decree or made the order, and the Court may make such order
there on as it thinks fit. Where an appeal has already been preferred against a judgment and
decree by one party, an application for a review of the judgment by another party is not barred
unless the grounds of appeal and application are the same; or when the applicant is a
respondent in the appeal, can present to the appellate Court ground son which he applies for
the review. An application for a review of the judgment may be made on any of the following
grounds:

(i) Discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due
diligence, was not within the knowledge, or could not be produced by the applicant at the time
when the decree was passed against him; or

(ii) On account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; or

(iii) For any other sufficient reason.

The application for a review of judgment shall be in the form of a memorandum of appeal,
and shall be presented to the Judge whose judgment is sought to be reviewed and, in case of his
death or transfer to his successor in office. As far as possible the very judge who passed the
decree, shall hear the application, unless he is precluded from hearing it by absence or other
cause for a period of six months next after the application. After the receipt of the application a
notice of the date fixed for its hearing shall be served upon the respondent or opposite party,
and then both the parties shall be heard. The law does not permit a second review. Now, let us
draft the application for the review of the judgment in the hypothetical case.

Revision

Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure lays down the principle of revision. It says
that (l) the High Court may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any Court
subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if
Such subordinate Court appears:
(a) To have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it. by law; or
(b) To have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested; or
(c) To have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

On doing so the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit; but it shall not vary
or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other
proceeding, unless:
(a) The order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision would have
finally disposed of the suit or other proceeding; or
(b) The order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury
to the party against whom it was made.
(2) The High Court, under this Sections, hall not vary or reverse any decree or order against
which an appeal lies either to the High Court or to any Court subordinate thereto.

The expression, any case which has been decided includes any order made, or any order
deciding an issue in the course of a suit or other proceeding,

If a Court tries a suit for which it has no jurisdiction to try having regard to its local
limit, or pecuniary limit, or the subject-matter thereof, it is an exercise of a jurisdiction not
vested in it by law. Likewise, where a court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit, or to execute a
decree, or to review its judgment, but refuses to do so on the ground that it has no jurisdiction,
it is a case of failure to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law. Similarly, it is an illegality, 'or
a material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction vested in. a court, if it passes a decree on
an unstamped promissory note or an order against a person without hearing him at all.
Presuming that in the hypothetical case, the promissory note was unstamped, now let us draft
an application for revision. The petition for revision shall state the grounds on which the
revision is sought for.

Problem
John Robert of Bandra, Bombay, a Manager in a sugar Factory at Sholapur, died on 5th April,
1987, at Sholapur, He had shares in Bombay Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. At Bombay of the face
value of Rs.30,000. He had Government Promissory Notes of the value of Rs.15,000 issued at
Bombay. He had insurance policy of Rs. 20,000 in the Life Insurance Company. He left behind
him three sons: (1) William, (2) Peter and (3) Nicholson, the last Nicholson is aged 12 years,
the deceased has left no will, and Peter has no objection to the Court granting the certificate to
William. Draft a petition for Succession Certificate.
(i) Petition for Succession Certificate

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

(Testamentary and intestate Jurisdiction)
Application No. .of 1987
Petition under S. 372 of the Indian Succession Act.
1. William, son of John Robert (give particulars).
2. Peter, Son of John Robert (give particulars).
3. Nicholson, son of John Robert, minor aged 12 years represented by petitioner No. 1
who is related as brother.

This humble petition of the abovenamed petitioners is as under that:

1. John Robert, the father of the petitioners died on 5th April 1987 at Sholapur leaving
behind him three sons, i.e. the abovenamed petitioners.
2. The said John Robert ordinarily resided at Sholapur at the time of the death at House
No. 25, Navi Peth, Sholapur within the local limits of this Court.
3. The following are the members of the family and near relatives of the deceased:
(i) William
(ii) Peter Sons of the deceased
(iii) Nicholson
4. The petitioners are the sons and the legal heirs of the deceased.
 5. There is no impediment to the grant of the certificate or the validity thereof if it were
granted either under S. 370 or any other provision of the Indian Succession Act or any
other enactment. Petitioners brother Peter has no objection to the issuing of the
certificate asked for, by the petitioner.
6. The following are the debts, securities etc. for which the certificate is applied.

Name of Debtor Amount due on Description and date

The date of the of instrument by which
Application debt is secured.
Securities

1. Bombay steam Navigation Rs. 300 Preference share of the

Co. Ltd. Bombay said Company with
number
Ranging from.to
2. Govt. Pronotes Rs. 15,000 Notes
Notodated
issued at Bombay issued at G.P.O,
Bombay
3. Life Insurance Corporation Insurance Policies
Of India Rs. 20,000 Policy No. .dated
issued at Bombay.

Cash at Bank
1. Llyods Bank, Bombay Rs. 10,000
2. Punjab National Bank Rs. 10,000
Bombay.

Total amount for which the certificate applied is Rs. 85,000

7. The applicant prays that the succession certificate be granted to the petitioner for
collection of the debts, securities and cash specified in para 6 above and the petitioner
may further be empowered by the said certificate to receive Interest or dividends on,
and to negotiate or transfer the said securities.

Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner
Verification
I, William, son of John Robert, the Petitioner abovenamed, hereby solemnly affirm that
the contents of Paragraphs 1 to 6 of this petition are true to my personal knowledge and
belief.
Solemnly affirmed as aforesaid at Bombay.

This 15th day of February 1987

Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner
(ii)Petition for grant of Letters of Administration
Excise
A died intestate at . possessed of some properties situated within the ordinary
Original Jurisdiction of the District Court at., leaving B, a window and C, a minor son.
B, as natural guardian of the minor, wants to take out Letters A Administration to the
estate of her deceased husband for the use and benefit of her minor son, Draft a
petition for the same.
IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE..
Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction
Petition No.. of 1987
Petition for the letter of administration of the property and credits of the late Mr..
who died on 30.05.10.and
B, etc (give particulars)..Petitioner.
The most respectfully showeth:
1. That abovenamed .died aton or about the .day of 19
2. That the said deceased at the time of his death left property with him the Town of .in the
State of
3. That the said deceased died intestate; due and diligent search has been made for a will bur
none has been found.
4. That the said deceased left him surviving his only next-of-kin according to Christian personal
law, who is residing at..
5. That the petitioner as the window of the said deceased claims to be entitled to one-fourth
share of the estate of the deceased.
6. That the petitioners has truly set forth in Schedule No. I hereto annexed all the properties
and credits which the deceased died possessed of or entitled to at the time of his death
which have or are likely to come to the petitioners hand.
7. That the petitioner has also truly set forth in Schedule No. II all items that by law he is
allowed to deduct.
8. That the said assets exclusive of what the deceased may have been possessed of or entitled
to as a trustee for another or others and not beneficiary or with power to confer a beneficial
interest and also exclusive of the items mentioned in the said Schedule No. II but inclusive of
all rents, interests and dividends and increased value since the date of his death, are under
the value of Rs.
9. That no. application has been made to any District Court or Delegate or to any High Court for
Probate of any Will of the said deceased or Letter of Administration with or without the Will
annexed to this property and credits.

The Petitioner therefore prays that Letter of Administration may be

granted to her having effect throughout the territory of the State.
Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner
 I, .., the petitioner avobenamed do solemnly declare that what is stated
in paragraph 1 to 9, is true to the best of my information and belief and I believe the
same to be true.
Solemnly declare as aforesaid
Sd/-
Petitioner
Dated this ..day of .19
at..
Before me
Sd/-
Oath Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Petition Noof 1987
Testamentary and Intestate jurisdiction.
Petition for Probate of the Will of the deceased
Chintaman Ganesh Deshpande of Dadar, Bobmay
And
Vasudev Shankar Jhoshi residing at.. Hindu Colony,
Dadar, Bombay.
The petitioner most respectfully showeth:
1. That the abovenamed Chintaman Ganesh Deshpande died at. Hindu Colony, Dadar on or
about the 3rd day of October, 1987.
2. That the said deceased at the time of his death had his fixed place of abode at Dadar and his
property is within the town and Island of Bombay in the State of Maharashtra.
3. That the writing hereinto annexed and marked as Schedule A is his last Will and testament.
4. That the said Will was duly executed by the deceased at Dadar on the 3rd day of January,
1986.
5. That the petitioner is the executor or one of the executors named in (or according to the
tenure thereof) the said Will.
6. That the petitioner has truly set forth in Schedule B hereto annexed all the property and
credits which the deceased died possessed of or entitled to at the time of his death which
have or are likely to come to his hands.
7. That the petitioner has also truly set forth in Schedule C all the items that by law he is
allowed to deduct (here in Schedule C give full particulars of debts due by the estate,
including the names creditors, amounts of claims, and the dates when they became due
must be given in the Schedule).
8. That the said assets exclusive of what the deceased may have been possessed of or entitled
to as the trustee of another and not beneficiary or with power to confer a beneficial interest
and also exclusive of the items mentioned in the said Schedule No. 2, but inclusive of all
rents, interest and dividends and increased value since the date of his death are under the
value of Rs. 2,00,000.
 9. That the said deceased left him surviving the petitioner as his only next-of kin according to
the Hindu Law.
10. That no application has been made to any District Court (or if made, state to Court , by
which whom and what proceedings have had been) or delegate or to any other High Court
for Probate of any Will of the said deceased or Letters of Administration with or without the
Will annexed to his property and credits.
The petitioner, therefore, prays that Probate may be granted to him having effect throughout
the state of Maharashtra, or throughout the Republic of India.
Sd/- Sd/-
Petitioners Advocate Petitioner

I, Wasudeo Shankar Joshi, the above-named petitioner do solemnly dclare that what is
stated in paras 1 to 6 is true to my own knowledge and that what is stated in the remaining
paragraphs is true to the best of my information and belief and I believe the same to be true.
Solemnly declared as aforesaid at Bombay.
This 17th day of January, 1987
Interpreted and Identified
Sd/- Sd/-

Petitioners Advocate Petitioner

Before me
Associate

Summons for Judgment in Summary Suit with Affidavit in Support

IN THE COURT IF SMALL CAUSES AT BOMBAY
Summary Suit No. 8745 of 1988
(0.37, r.2, C.P.C.)
M/s White Star Pigments
Chemical (Give address)
..Plaintiff
v.
M/s Cromelite Transport
(Give address)
.Defendants

Let all parties concerned attend before the judge in Chambers on the 18 th day of
October, 19.. at 11 OClock in the afternoon at the hearing of an application on the
part of the Plaintiff that judgment be entered for the plaintiff in this suit against the
Defendant for Rs. 8,000 as set out in the Plain herein, and for interest and costs.
Dated the 5th day of October, 19..

This Summons has been issued at

the.. Instance of .. Advocate

for the .Plaintiff.

Sd/-

Advocate for the Plaintiff.

To
M/s Cromelite Transport
(Give Address)
N.B. The affidavit of Mr ABC dated the 5th October, 19. will be used in support of
the Summons for judgment.
(Affidavit for Summons for judgment)

IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT BOMBAY

Summary Suit No. 8745 of 1987.
M/s White Star Pigments Chemicals .Plaintiff
v.
M/s Cromelite Transport ..Defendants

I, C.B Joshi, the partner of the Plaintiffs abovenamed do hereby solemnly affirm and
state as follows that:
1. I say that the Plaintiff have field the above suit to recover from the defendants a sum of Rs.
8,000 and costs and interest as prayed for in the plaint being the price of 22 bags delivered
to by the Plaintiffs to the defendants on 9th March, 1987.
2. I say that on 9th March, 1987, the Plaintiffs consigned and delivered to the defendants 70
bags of Glass White Power as per terms and conditions mentioned in the said consignment
Note No. 3997 dated 10 March, 1987.
3. I say that out of the 70 bags, 22 bags were delivered by the defendants to the said consignee
in a torn condition resulting in a loss of 250 kgs. of the powder costing Rs. 8,000 (Rupees
Eight thousand only).
4. I say that Plaintiffs several times by their letters and finally by another letter dated 9 th
March, 1987 through their Advocate, called upon the defendants to pay up the said amount.
But the defendants did not pay the said amount in compliance with the requisitions of the
Plaintiffs aforesaid letter. The copy of the said letter is annexed hereto and is marked as Ex.
A..
5. I say that the defendants are truly and justly indebted to the Plaintiffs for a sum of Rs. 8,000
and costs and interest as prayed for in the Plaint.
6. I confirm, repeat, verify and maintain the statements made in the Plaint.
 7. I say that there no defence to the suit and the decree be passed against them.

I, therefore, pray that the Summons for judgment taken out by the Plaintiff be made
absolute with costs.
Solemnly affirmed at Bombay this

.day of November 1987.

Sd/-

Advocate for Plaintiff.

Deponent

Before me.