16.

Or
derVI
IIRul
e3,
4and5oft
heCodeofCi
vi
lPr
ocedur
e(f
orshor
tasCode)r
eadasunder
;

"3.Deni
alt
obespecifi
c.-I
tshall
notbesuffi
cientforadefendantinhiswr
it
tenstatementto
denygeneral
lyt
hegroundall
egedbytheplai
nt i
ff
,butthedefendantmustdealspecif
ical
l
ywith
eachall
egati
onoff
actofwhi chhedoesnotadmi tthetr
uth,exceptdamages.

4.Evasi
vedeni al
-Whereadef endantdeniesanall
egationoffactintheplaint,
hemustnotdoso
evasi
vely,
butanswert hepointofsubstance.Thus,i
fitisal
legedthather ecei
vedacert
ainsum
ofmoney ,itshal
lnotbesuffi
cienttodenythathereceivedthatpart
icul
aramount ,
buthemust
denythather ecei
vedthatsum oranypar tt
hereof
,orelsesetouthowmuchher ecei
ved.Andi
f
anall
egationismadewi thdiversecir
cumstances,i
tshallnotbesuffici
enttodenyital
ongwith
thosecir
cumst ances.

5.Specifi
cdenial
-[
(1)]Ev
er yall
egat
ionoffacti
ntheplaint
,ifnotdeniedspeci
fical
l
yorby
necessaryimpli
cati
on,orst at
edtobenotadmi t
tedinthepleadingofthedefendant,
shall
be
takentobeadmi tt
edexceptasagai nstapersonunderdisabil
i
ty;Provi
dedthattheCourtmayi
n
i
tsdiscreti
onrequi
reanyf actsoadmi t
tedtobeprovedotherwisethanbysuchadmi ssi
on.

(2)Wher ethedefendanthasnotfil
edapl eadi
ng, i
tshall
bel awfulf
ortheCourttopronounce
j
udgmentont hebasisofthefactcontainedintheplai
nt,exceptasagainstapersonundera
disabi
l
ity,buttheCourtmay,i
nitsdiscreti
on,requi
reanysuchf acttobeproved.(3)In
exerci
singitsdiscr
eti
onundertheprovisotosub- r
ule(1)orundersub-rul
e(2)
,theCour tshal
l
haveduer egardtothefactwhetherthedefendantcouldhav e,orhas,
engagedapl eader.

(4)Whenev erajudgmentispr
onouncedunderthi
srul
e,adecr
eeshal
lbedr
awnupin
accordancewithsuchjudgmentandsuchdecreeshal
lbeart
hedateonwhi
cht
hejudgmentwas
pronounced.]
"

17.TheeffectofOr der8Rule3r eadalongwi t

hr r4and5oft heCodeisthat
,defendantis
boundtodeal specifi
call
ywitheachallegati
onoff actnotadmitt
edbyhim;hemustei therdeny
orstat
edef i
nit
elythatthesubstanceofeachal legati
onisnotadmitt
ed.Themainal l
egations
whichformt hefoundationofthesuitshouldbedeal twit
hinthatwayandexpresslydenied.
Factsnotspecifi
callydeal
twithwill
bet akentobeadmi t
tedunderOrder8Rul
e5oft heCode.

18.Order8Rule5oft heCodeisknownasdoct ri
neofnon- t
raversewhi
chmeanst hatwherea
material
avermentispassedov erwit
houtspeci
fi
cdenial
,iti
st akent
obeadmi tt
ed.Therul
e
saysthatanyal
legati
onoffactmustei t
herbedeniedspecif
icall
yorbynecessar
yimpli
cati
onor
ther
eshouldbeast atementthatthefacti
snotadmitt
ed.Ifthepleaisnott
akeninthatmanner,
thentheall
egat
ionshouldtakent obeadmitt
ed.

19.SupremeCourti
nM.Venkat
aramanHebbar(
D)ByL.
RS.Vs.M.Raj
gopal
Hebbar&Or
s.2007
(5)SCALE598,obser
ved;

"Thus,ifapleawhichwasrel
evantf
orthepur
poseofmaintai
ningasui
thadnotbeen
specif
icall
ytrav
ersed,
theCourtwasenti
tl
edt
odrawaninferencet
hatt
hesamehadbeen
admi
tt
ed.Af
actadmi
tt
edi
nter
msofSect
ion58oft
heEv
idenceActneednotbepr
oved.
"