What is the distinction between Rule 2 and 3 of order 17 of CPC?

Introduction
The Rule 2 and 3 of Order 17 address situations where parties
involved in a legal suit fail to fulfill their procedural obligations,
whether it be non-appearance on adjourned dates (Rule 2) or non-
compliance with court orders or timelines (Rule 3). In legal
proceedings, the court is granted discretionary powers to take
appropriate action in response to these defaults, which may include
disposing of the suit, making specific orders, or proceeding with the
decision of the case despite the party's non-compliance. The objective
is to maintain the fair and efficient functioning of the legal process,
ensuring that cases move forward even in the face of challenges posed
by non-appearance or non-compliance by the involved parties.
Relevant provision
Rule 2 and 3 of Order 17 of CPC.
Rule 2 of Order 17
Where, on any day to which the hearing of the suit is adjourned,
the parties or any of them fail to appear
 This means that if, on a scheduled day for the hearing of a
lawsuit, either all or some of the parties involved in the case do
not show up in court.
the Court may proceed to dispose of the suit in one of the modes
directed in that behalf by Order IX
 In such a situation, the court has the authority to continue with
the proceedings and make a decision on the case using the
methods specified in Order IX.
or make such other order as it thinks fit
 Alternatively, the court can also choose to issue any other order
that it deems appropriate in the given circumstances. This gives
 the court flexibility to handle the situation in the best way
possible.
Condition for invoking Rule 2
Under Order 17 Rule 2, if any party fails to appear, the Court may
proceed to dispose of the suit in one of the modes directed in that
behalf by Order 9 or make such other order as it thinks fit. Order 17,
Rule 6 (1)(a) would be applicable after the summons has been duly
served and the defendant does not appear but this provision would not
apply where he had appeared and filed the written statement. Or
makes default in respect of any act. To attract the provisions of this
Rule non/appearance must be on the date of hearing i.e. a date on
which judicial examination of dispute between parties is to take place.
The order if passed otherwise would be void ab initio.
The essential condition for invoking the provisions of Rule 2 Order 17
is that the proceedings must be adjourned in the suit for the
consideration of the questions relating to the suit, to enable the judge
to come to an adjudication of the issues or controversy. The use of the
term “hearing of the suit” in the scheme of the provisions of Rule 2
Order 17 refers to the stages of proceedings pertaining to taking of
evidence, hearing of arguments, settlement of issues, resulting in final
disposal of the case. Where there is sufficient material on record to
dispose of the controversy conclusively despite non-performance of
an act, including production of evidence or attendance of the
witnesses, by any one of the parties to the suit, the provisions of Rule
3 instead of Rule 2 of order 17 of the code shall be enforceable.
Rule 3 of Order 17
Where any party to a suit to whom time has been granted fails to
produce his evidence, or to cause the attendance of his witnesses,
or to perform any other act necessary to the further progress of
the suit, for which time has been allowed, the Court may,
notwithstanding each default, proceed to decide the suit
forthwith.
  In a civil suit, when one of the parties is given a specific amount
of time to present their evidence, bring their witnesses, or
complete any other necessary action for the progress of the case,
and they fail to do so, the court has the authority to proceed with
the decision of the case immediately, without considering the
default of the party.
 This means that if a party does not fulfill their obligations within
the given time frame, the court can still make a decision in the
case, even if the defaulting party has not completed their
required actions.
 The court is not required to wait for the defaulting party to fulfill
their obligations before making a decision.
 This provision allows the court to ensure that the progress of the
case is not hindered by the default of one of the parties.
 It also prevents unnecessary delays in the legal process and
allows for a timely resolution of the case.
 However, it is important to note that the court's decision in such
a situation should be fair and just, taking into consideration the
rights and interests of all parties involved in the suit.
Applicability of Rule 3
Rule 3 applies to a case where time has been granted to a party at his
instance, to produce evidence, or to cause the attendance of witnesses
or to perform any other act necessary for the progress of the suit and
will not apply unless default has been committed by such party in
doing the act for which the time was granted. Term “decide” referred
to in Order 17 Rule 3 could only be pressed into service where there
was no material available on record for the disposal of the suit. Entire
suit could not be dismissed on the basis of default on the part of one
of the plaintiffs. Action should be taken only when the party was
wilfully negligent. Condition mentioned in Rule 3 of Order 17 must
be fulfilled before the action was initiated. The term “decide
forthwith” refers to the decision within a reasonable time under the
circumstances and the Court may decide the suit on the same day. It
may also be mentioned that the decision should be on merits. The
application of the above Rule is in the nature of an exception to the
general provisions contained in Rule 2 which applies to the cases
where the adjournment is generally granted not for specific purpose,
while this Rule applies where the adjournment is granted for any of
the purposes mentioned in the Rule.
Rule 2 Rule 3
1. Scenario 1. Where any party
Where, on any day to to a suit to
which the hearing of whom time has
the suit is adjourned, been granted
the parties or any of fails to produce
them fail to appear. his evidence, or
to cause the
attendance of
his witnesses, or
to perform any
2. Courts authority other act
The Court may necessary to the
proceed to dispose of further progress
the suit in one of the of the suit, for
modes directed in that which time has
behalf by Order IX or been allowed.
make such other order 2. The Court may,
as it thinks fit. notwithstanding
3. Implication each default,
Focuses on proceed to
consequences when decide the suit
parties fail to appear forthwith.
on an adjourned date. 3. Focuses on
consequences
when a party
fails to comply
with the granted
time for
 4. Application essential
Rule 2 applies where actions.
the party fails to 4. Rule 3 even
appear at the hearing. applies where
the party is
present but has
committed any
of the defaults
mentioned in
the rule.
Key Differences:
1. Focus:
 Rule 2 focuses on non-appearance of a party on an
adjourned hearing date.
 Rule 3 focuses on non-compliance with a court order.
2. Trigger:
 Rule 2 is triggered by the failure to appear on an adjourned
date.
 Rule 3 is triggered by the failure to comply with a court
order.
3. Court's Options:
 Rule 2 provides options like dismissal, decision on merits,
or other appropriate orders.
 Rule 3 allows the court to proceed as if the act had been
done, strike out the suit/defense, or make other orders.
4. Applicability:
 Rule 2 deals with the general absence of a party on an
adjourned date.
 Rule 3 deals with specific instances of non-compliance
with court orders.
Additional Points:
 Both rules grant the court discretionary powers to determine the
appropriate course of action based on the circumstances.
 Rule 3 is considered more drastic, and courts tend to apply it
sparingly due to its potential impact on the party in default.
 The explanation under Rule 2 is noteworthy as it allows the
court to proceed on merits even in cases of absence, provided a
substantial portion of evidence has been recorded.
 Courts may interpret the rules liberally, allowing disposal on
merits under Rule 3 even in cases where evidence has not been
strictly "recorded," as long as some material is available.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the examination of Rule 2 and Rule 3 under Order 17
of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) sheds light on the legal
mechanisms employed when parties in a lawsuit fail to fulfill their
procedural obligations. Rule 2 addresses non-appearance on
adjourned dates, allowing the court to dispose of the suit or make
alternative orders, while Rule 3 focuses on non-compliance with court
orders or timelines, granting the court the authority to decide the suit
despite such defaults.