APCRPCO Section 111 : Proceedings not to be adjourned sine die or struck off the file

Explanation using Example

Example 1: Adjournment of a Civil Suit

Introduction: In the city of Hyderabad, a civil suit is filed by Mr. Reddy against Mr. Sharma for breach of contract. The case is scheduled for a hearing, but due to unforeseen circumstances, Mr. Reddy's lawyer requests an adjournment.

Application: According to Section 111 of The Andhra Pradesh Civil Rules Of Practice And Circular Orders, 1990, no suit can be adjourned sine die or struck off the file. The court must set a specific date for the next hearing. If a date is not set, the case will automatically be scheduled for one month later.

Outcome: The court denies the request for an indefinite adjournment. Instead, it reschedules the hearing for a specific date two weeks later. This ensures the case remains active and progresses without unnecessary delays.

Conclusion: Compliance with this provision prevents indefinite delays in legal proceedings, ensuring timely justice. Non-compliance could lead to procedural complications and potential sanctions for the parties involved.

Example 2: Partition Suit with Preliminary Decree

Introduction: In Vijayawada, a family files a suit for partition of ancestral property. A preliminary decree is passed, allotting shares to each family member.

Application: The provision allows for adjournment sine die in partition suits where a preliminary decree has been passed. Parties can apply for a final decree when ready. This is an exception to the general rule against indefinite adjournments.

Outcome: The court adjourns the proceedings sine die , granting liberty to any party to apply for the final decree. This flexibility accommodates the time needed for parties to agree on the division of property.

Conclusion: This exception ensures that parties have the necessary time to settle complex partition matters. It highlights the court's adaptability in handling specific types of cases while maintaining procedural integrity.

Example 3: Consequences of Non-Compliance

Introduction: In Guntur, a lawyer inadvertently fails to request a specific date for the next hearing in a civil case.

Application: As per Section 111, if a specific date is not set, the case is automatically scheduled for one month later. This automatic scheduling prevents the case from being struck off the file.

Outcome: The court clerk notices the oversight and schedules the case for a hearing one month later. This ensures continuity and adherence to procedural rules.

Conclusion: The provision safeguards against procedural errors by providing a default scheduling mechanism. Non-compliance could lead to delays, but the rule mitigates this risk by ensuring cases remain active.

Example 4: Procedural Steps and Communication

Introduction: In Visakhapatnam, a civil case involves multiple parties, including a non-resident defendant.

Application: The court must ensure all parties are informed of the hearing dates. Section 111 mandates setting a specific date, which must be communicated clearly to all involved, including the non-resident defendant.

Outcome: The court issues formal notifications to all parties, including international mail to the non-resident defendant. This ensures everyone is aware of the proceedings and can prepare accordingly.

Conclusion: Clear communication is crucial for compliance with procedural requirements. Failure to inform parties could result in adjournments and procedural challenges.