The Calcutta Weekly Notes Monday May 11 1942

The Plaintiff is allowed to prove what he likes and set up any case he can—the Court coming to his assistance with the theory that it is the business and even the duty of the Court to ascertain and try the real case between the parties whatever the pleadings may be. [...] Not a little of this dangerous laxity is due to the provisions contained in Order X and Order XIV of the Civil Procedure Code which in spite of the elaborate pleadings of the parties rquire the Court to go about fishing for the matters in issue. [...] The English rules itroduced by the Judicature Acts are no doubt intended as a compromise between the rigid system prevailing in the Common Law Courts and the loose prolixity of the bill in Chancery—but since there the parties have to join issues and not the Court to frame them as in India the material facts have to be stated with rasonable fullness and accuracy. [...] 53 is not a suit in respect of the property of the insolvent but is a suit in respect of property which had been the property of the insolvent and which he had transferred in fraud of his creditors. [...] There is nothing in the Provincial Isolvency Act authorising the Insolvency Court to dismiss an application by a creditor for the adjudication of his debtor as insovent and to refer the partcs to the Civil Court on the ground that complicated quetions of law and facts are involved in the case.