A Court Must First Tell Parties What Issue Needs Proof Before Rejecting Their Case, Even in Ex Parte Suits

Held: The Supreme Court held that even in ex parte civil proceedings, courts must identify the “points for determination” and render a reasoned judgment in compliance with Order XX Rule 4 CPC, and although formal framing of issues may not be mandatory, failure to frame or consider material issues causing prejudice to a party vitiates the trial and judgment.

Summary: The case arose from a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, which was dismissed ex parte by the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court. The dismissal was based on the plaintiff’s failure to prove the defendant’s title, even though no issue regarding title had been framed and the plaintiff was not put to notice to lead evidence on that aspect. The Supreme Court examined the scheme of the Civil Procedure Code, particularly Order XIV and Order XX, and reiterated that while issues need not be formally framed in ex parte cases, the court is still obligated to identify the points for determination and adjudicate them with reasons. The Court emphasized that the purpose of framing issues is to inform parties of what they must prove, and omission to do so can cause serious prejudice if a party is denied an opportunity to lead evidence on a decisive issue. Applying this principle, the Court found that the plaintiff could not have anticipated the need to prove title when it was neither pleaded nor framed as an issue, and therefore the dismissal of the suit on that ground was legally unsustainable.

Decision: The Supreme Court set aside the judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court, remanded the matter for fresh trial with directions to frame proper issues, allow parties to complete pleadings and lead evidence, and decide the suit expeditiously, with no order as to costs.