Question

Under Section 35B of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, where a party fails to take a step required by the court on the date fixed, the court may:

• A. Impose costs as a precondition for allowing further prosecution.
• B. Dismiss the suit.
• C. Proceed with the suit without imposing any condition.
• D. Grant adjournment as a matter of right.

Hint:

Whenever Section 35B CPC appears in an exam, immediately associate it with "Costs for causing delay" and "condition for further prosecution."

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Concept: Section 35B CPC was introduced to discourage delays and ensure that parties diligently comply with procedural directions issued by the court.

Step 1: Purpose of Section 35B.
* Litigation should proceed efficiently and without unnecessary delay. * When a party causes delay by failing to perform a required act, the court may compensate the opposite party through costs.

Step 2: Power of the Court.
* The court may impose costs upon the defaulting party. * Payment of such costs may be made a condition precedent for further prosecution of the suit or defence.

Step 3: Analysis of options.
* The provision does not mandate dismissal of the suit. * Adjournment is not a matter of right. * The court is specifically empowered to award costs for causing delay.

Section 35B CPC = Costs for Delay in Proceedings.

Answer 2

Section 35B of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with the consequence of a party failing to take a step that the court required on a fixed date. Each option can be tested against what this specific provision actually empowers the court to do.

1. Impose costs as a precondition for allowing further prosecution: Section 35B was inserted specifically to penalise delay caused by a party's default in taking a required step, by empowering the court to award costs to the other side and to direct that the defaulting party may not proceed further with the suit or defence until those costs are paid. This is the precise mechanism the section creates.
2. Dismiss the suit: Section 35B does not provide for outright dismissal of the suit merely because a party failed to take a procedural step on a date. Dismissal for default is dealt with under separate provisions, not under Section 35B, which is concerned only with costs for delay.
3. Proceed with the suit without imposing any condition: this would defeat the entire object of Section 35B, which was inserted precisely because courts were allowing defaulting parties to continue without any consequence, causing chronic delay.
4. Grant adjournment as a matter of right: Section 35B, read with the general scheme of the CPC, treats adjournments as something within the court's discretion and often subject to costs, not as an entitlement a defaulting party can claim as of right.

Only the first option correctly describes the power Section 35B actually confers, using costs as a check on delay, rather than dismissing the suit outright, allowing default without consequence, or treating adjournment as an automatic right.

So the correct answer is impose costs as a precondition for allowing further prosecution.