Order 14 contains 7 rules and there consideration of the Drafting compels one to think why so many words and expressions have been deployed – there is a need to study the provision to accord prescribed connotation to the terms. Though it is called rules, each rule is so elaborate that it can be said that each rule is equivalent to a regular Section with its Sub-sections and Clauses. It may be considered, Judge is quite different from a Court – Court is genus [or universal] and the Judge is species [particular] – A Judge cannot function as a Judge and he cannot himself convert into a Court simultaneously or alternately in the same [proceeding], however, the following suggestion In Re Drafting Order XIV may be implemented.

All the 7 Rules may be reduced to a concise form without losing its jurisprudential status.

Issues and disposal of the same may be compressed in two Rules because it is not the Settlement of Issues as stated in the heading or Determination of Suit on issues of law or fact which are agreed upon, it is a wrong title – Rule 1 speaks about framing of issues as material proposition for issues where a material proposition is asserted not affirmed [which is wrong] by one party and countered [not denied as wrongly stated]. There should be an assertion and counter not affirmation or denial – material proposition are pleading [not allegation – is wrong] with regard to law or fact.

Each assertion the Counter shows the distinct issue. Sub rule 5 to Rule 1 provides for dealing with the issues at the first hearing. It is incorrect to state that the Court shall be at the first hearing hear the Parties or their Pleaders and to find out whether the Plaintiff or Defendant merely differ.

Such exercise shall not be indulged at the first hearing itself on questions which are foreign to the procedural law. It is stated that even if the Defendant makes no defence even than issues can be framed on the Plaint itself in support of the Pleadings therein.

Sub Rule 2 which requires court to pronounce Judgment on all issues shall be deleted – the question of Jurisdiction though it is an issue may be reserved for the time complete disposal of the suit. Initial question of Jurisdiction will give occasioned for either party to agitate the matter in the Higher Forum therefore Sub Rule 2 may be deleted.

Regarding Sub Rule 3 which speaks of materials from which issues may be framed shall also be deleted since the Court may not be burdened to deal with the materials on allegation made on oath by Parties etc. including the Pleader also since the content of document will contain no material to help the Court to come premature conclusion.

Sub Rule 4, it speaks about the power of Court to examine Witnesses or Documents before Framing of Issues shall be completely deleted since the Examination of Witnesses and Documents have no place in a Suit or Proceeding before the stage of Framing of Issues.

Sub Rule 5, it provides for power to a men and strike out issues will also be deleted since they are out of place before and during after the Framing of the Issues

Further Sub Rule 6, will also be deleted, it provides for questions of facts of law may by agreement be stated in the form of the issues and also Sub Rule 7, the Court if satisfy that the agreement was in good faith shall also be similarly deleted.

It may be remembered that law especially the procedural remains to be understood by the common man and it would be so simple to that extent.

All the 7 Sub Rules are so complicated and cumbersome which establishes a fact – a Civil Suit is a long pending case involving consuming of time and money therefore Order XIV may be treated as a simple procedure whereby the Court shall read the pleadings in the Plaint and also in the Written Statement besides the Documents and proceed further without delay, frame issues of facts and law and march onwards for logical conclusion.