Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This first appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3rd March, 2009 passed on admission by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) 1st Court at Alipore in Title Suit No. 46 of 2006 at the instance of the defendant/appellant.
(2.) We will have to assess the correctness of the impugned judgment and decree in the light of the provision contained in Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code. The provision contained in Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code is much more comprehensive than the provision contained in Order 12 Rule 1 of CPC. Though it is true that the jurisdiction to pass a decree on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure code is discretionary and the Court may in suitable circumstances, refuse to grant a decree on admission in favour of the plaintiff. However, the Court cannot refuse to grant a decree on admission when the admission of the plaint case made by the defendant is clear, unambiguous and explicit. Such admission can be gathered either from the pleading of the parties or from any other sources i.e. documentary evidence or oral evidence of the parties. As a matter of fact, use of the expression "otherwise" in Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code is very much significant as by use of such expression "otherwise" jurisdiction of this Court to pass a decree on admission is not restricted only to the admission made by the defendant in his pleading.
(3.) The original provision contained in Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code was amended in 1976 for the purpose of shortening litigation and to give speedy relief to the deserving party and as such the scope and/or ambit of this provision cannot be narrowed down by giving any interpretation to the said provision which is not in consonance with the object of such amendment.;