Rule 21 of CPC : Rule 21: Non-compliance with order for discovery.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: Rajesh files a lawsuit against his former business partner, Suresh, for breach of contract. During the discovery phase, Rajesh requests Suresh to provide certain financial documents and answer specific interrogatories (written questions that must be answered under oath).

Application of Rule 21:

• Suresh fails to comply with the court's order to provide the requested documents and answer the interrogatories.
• Rajesh applies to the court for an order under Rule 21.
• The court, after giving Suresh a reasonable opportunity to be heard, decides to strike out Suresh's defense.
• As a result, Suresh is placed in the same position as if he had not defended the case at all, significantly weakening his position in the lawsuit.

Example 2:

Scenario: Priya sues a construction company for poor workmanship in building her house. During the discovery process, the court orders Priya to provide certain emails and documents related to the contract and construction process.

Application of Rule 21:

• Priya fails to comply with the court's order to produce the requested documents.
• The construction company applies to the court for an order under Rule 21.
• The court, after giving Priya a reasonable opportunity to be heard, decides to dismiss Priya's suit for want of prosecution.
• As a result, Priya is precluded from bringing a fresh suit on the same cause of action, meaning she cannot file another lawsuit against the construction company for the same issue.

Example 3:

Scenario: Anil files a lawsuit against a car manufacturer for selling him a defective vehicle. During the discovery phase, the court orders Anil to answer certain interrogatories and provide maintenance records of the vehicle.

Application of Rule 21:

• Anil fails to comply with the court's order to answer the interrogatories and provide the maintenance records.
• The car manufacturer applies to the court for an order under Rule 21.
• The court, after giving Anil a reasonable opportunity to be heard, decides to dismiss Anil's suit for want of prosecution.
• As a result, Anil is precluded from bringing a fresh suit on the same cause of action, meaning he cannot file another lawsuit against the car manufacturer for the same defect in the vehicle.

Example 4:

Scenario: Meera sues her employer for wrongful termination. During the discovery phase, the court orders Meera to provide certain emails and documents related to her employment and termination.

Application of Rule 21:

• Meera fails to comply with the court's order to produce the requested documents.
• The employer applies to the court for an order under Rule 21.
• The court, after giving Meera a reasonable opportunity to be heard, decides to dismiss Meera's suit for want of prosecution.
• As a result, Meera is precluded from bringing a fresh suit on the same cause of action, meaning she cannot file another lawsuit against her employer for the same wrongful termination.