L.Q1] Fundamentals Rules of Pleading and when the amendment of pleading is permissible.

1. Introduction
In the court of law, pleadings serve as the case's skeleton or its basis. Pleadings are specifically covered in Order VI of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and it talks about Pleadings in General.
Order VI contains 18 rules altogether. According to the provision of this act, pleading means a plaint or written
statement.
Rule 1 talks about Pleading.
Rule 2 outlines the basic principle of Pleading.
Rule 3- 13 mandates the parties to provide with the required documents.
Rules 14-15 cover the signing and verification of pleading respectively.
Rule 16 grants the power to the court to strike out pleadings at any stage of proceedings.
Rules 17-18 talk about the amendment of pleadings.

2. Meaning and Definition (Rule-1)

According to P.C. Mogha - pleading is a statement in writing drawn up and filed by each party in any suit. It includes all
those things upon which the suit is a frame and the defendant submits his written statement. In the initial stage of a
lawsuit called pleading, parties formally present their claims and defenses. In this, a plaintiff submits a complaint, or
plaint, outlining their cause of action and the issues at hand. The defendant provides a written statement in response
outlining his or her defenses and denies it. A counterclaim naming a cause of action against the plaintiff may also be
submitted by the defendant. An essential purpose of pleadings is to inform the defendant that a lawsuit has been filed
against him. Additionally, it informs the plaintiff of the defendant's plans for the lawsuit.

3. Object
The whole object of the pleading is to
1. To bring the parties to definite issues
2. To prevent surprise on miscarriage of justice
3. To Avoid unnecessary expenses and Trouble
4. To Save Public Time
5. To eradicate irrelevance
6. To Assist the Court

4. Fundamental Rules of Pleading: [Rule 2]

1. Facts and not law

Pleadings should state the facts and not law, its the duty of the parties,

In the case of Kedar Lal v. Hari Lal [AIR 1952 SC 47] : the Supreme Court ruled that in a civil lawsuit, the parties
are only required to describe the events that occurred and the basis for their claims in their pleadings; it is the judiciary's
responsibility to apply the law. It implies that the parties should outline their claims and the reasons why they should be
accepted.

2. Material facts

The facts should be material facts, The term "material fact" is not specifically defined in the CPC, 1908, or any other law.
In Udhav Singh v. Madhav Rao Scindia,[5] the Supreme Court provided the following definition of "material fact":
According to the court, "material facts" are all those important details that the parties rely on to support their claims and
establish their causes of action or to make a strong defense or counterclaim against the party making the initial claim.

The courts have noted that determining what facts or information qualifies as a material fact is a subjective matter that
will be decided by the court on an individual basis depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.

3. Facts and not evidence

Pleading should not state the evidence, This rule mandates that the evidence in the pleadings be excluded. In other words,
the party is not required to mention the witnesses or documentary evidence that it intends to present to the court to use
against the opposing party. This is done to guarantee the safety of the evidence and the fairness of a trial. According to
jurisprudence, there are two different types of facts: facta probanda and facta probantia.

Facts probanda: material facts and Facts probantia: evidence

4. Concise form
 The facts stated in the pleading should be in a concise form. The last and most important fundamental rule, also known as
the "rule of brevity," calls for the pleadings to be concise, clear, and limited to the interpretation that the pleader wishes to
convey. Not only should the pleading be brief, but it also needs to be precise. Even though the pleading must be concise,
it must also be accurate and certain. For the sake of brevity, pleadings shouldn't be compromised in terms of clarity and
specificity. However, this does not imply that the facts that must be stated are so brief as to lose their significance in the
pleadings.

CL: Virendra Kashinath v. Vinayak N. Joshi

The Supreme Court made the following observation "Pleadings must be brief and niggling [i.e. causing slight but
persistent annoyance, discomfort, or anxiety should be avoided.]" However, this does not imply that crucial information
must be left out or overlooked to achieve brevity. According to the court, if syntax errors and drafting style are avoided,
pleadings can be clear and legible.

5. Amendment Of Pleading [Rules 17 and 18]

Amendment of a pleading is covered by Rules 17 and 18 of Order VI of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908. These rules work to bring about justice in society. According to Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
either party may be required to amend or alter his pleading at any point during the proceeding in a fair and just manner,
allowing amendment when necessary to settle the precise contentious issue between the parties.

Rule 18 deals with the problem of the pleading not being amended. It deals with the law that states if a party is ordered
by the court to make a necessary change and fails to do so within the time limit specified in the order, or if no time limit
is specified, then within 14 days of the order's date, he will not be allowed to amend after the time limit specified above,
or after such 14 days, as the case may be, unless the time is extended by the court.

6. Conclusion

Any legal case's foundation is made up of pleadings. The pleading lays out the case. It directs the parties to develop their
arguments and understand the other party's claims to frame claims or defenses for either party, as appropriate. It serves as
direction for the entire suit journey.

They also specify what types of admissible evidence the parties may present during the trial. The fundamental guidelines
for pleadings are outlined in the Code of Civil Procedure, along with any modifications. These rules are intended to
achieve justice's highest goals while maintaining social harmony.

Pleading should state the facts, The fact should be material facts, Pleading should not state the evidence.

The facts stated in the pleading should be in a concise form, Each party is obliged to provide appropriate details under
Rules 3 to 13, Pleadings are signed and verified according to Rules 14 and 15. A court can throw out superfluous pleas
under Rule 16, Modification of pleadings is addressed in Rules 17 and 18.

S.N-1] Foreign Judgement

1. Introduction

Section 13 and Section 14 enact a rule of res Judicata in case of Foreign Judgements These provisions embody the
principle of private International law that a judgment delivered by a foreign court of competent jurisdiction can be
 enforced by an Indian Court and will operate as res judicata between the parties thereto except in the cases mentioned in
sec-13

2. Definition

A Foreign Court is defined under Section 2 (5) means a court situated outside India and not established or continued by
the authority of the central government.

Foreign Judgement the term foreign judgments defined under Section 2 (6) of the code of civil procedure means the
judgment of a foreign court,

3. Nature and Scope

Section 13 embodies the principle of res judicata in foreign judgments. This provision expresses the principle of private
international law that a judgment delivered by a foreign court of competent jurisdiction can be enforced in India. The rule
laid down in section 13

5. Object of Section.13 And 14

The judgment of a foreign court is enforced on the principle that where a court of competent jurisdiction has adjudicated
upon a claim, a legal obligation arises to satisfy that claim. The rules of private international law of each State must in the
very nature of things differ, but by the comity of nations, certain rules are recognized as common to civilized
jurisdictions.

6. Enforcement of foreign judgments in India:

There are three primary sources of law about

1] Laws passed by the parliament (i.e. the Code):

Section 44A of the Code explains the constitutional principle that the judgment handed down by a Superior Court of the
Reciprocating Territory (as previously highlighted Government within Official Gazette) is implemented in India as
though it were a ruling enacted by the Indian District Courts. That being said, a judgment emerging from a non-
reciprocating territory cannot be immediately mandated in the same way and a fresh case should be issued for its
regulation in which such a judgment is of only evidentiary value. Also, it may well be noted that both of the
classifications of judgments referred to above are needed to comply with the terms set out in Section 13 of the Code,
which offers that a foreign judgment is definitive. However, Section 14 of the Code gives rise to a supposition in pursuit
of the authority of the foreign court making the judgment in question.

2] Bilateral treaties with the reciprocating countries concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments to
which India is a party; and

3] Judicial precedents: the landmark case of Moloji Nar Singh Rao v Shankar Saran reads that a foreign judgment not
emanating from a superior court of a reciprocating territory cannot be executed in India without the filing of a new suit in
which the said judgment has only evidentiary value.

Case Law: Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India [ AIR 2011 SC 1290 ]

The famous case of Aruna Shanbaug v. Union of India, decided by the Supreme Court of India, epitomizes all this
argument. The Supreme Court of India responded to the plea for euthanasia filed by Aruna Shaunbag, a colleague of a
reporter Pinki Virani, by trying to set up the medical panel to better understand her. On 7 March 2011, the court rejected
the plea for mercy killing. Even then, it permitted passive euthanasia in India in its landmark case. As the Court did
initially, it depended mostly on judgments of foreign courts, since there was no law on the matter in India.

The Court said, “There is still a wide range of case statutory provisions of active and passive euthanasia by courts all
around the world. It isn’t appropriate to return in-depth to all of the judicial decisions in the world mostly on the topic of
euthanasia or physician-assisted death, and yet we consider it appropriate to relate in-depth to these landmark decisions
that have placed down the rules on the subject.”

7. Conclusion

There is almost no issue having to rely on foreign court decisions. Even so, judges must be careful not to give greater credit to
case law decided in completely different social and economic scenarios. In this age of globalization of legislative requirements,
there is no justification to restrain judicial dialogue among different legal systems based on similar rules and ideals. But, without a
reason to suspect, neither of these judgments are enforceable upon the Supreme Court of India, although they are institutions of
high compelling valuation to which the Judges may justifiably turn for guidance. People must, however, be judged in the sense of
India’s standards and regulatory procedures and the practicalities of lawsuits in India.