presentation of plaint order

• More Blog Popular
• Who's Who Legal
• Instruct Counsel
• My newsfeed
• Save & file
• View original
• Follow Please login to follow content.

add to folder:

• My saved (default)

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Find out more about Lexology or get in touch by visiting our About page.

Interpreting Order VII, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Introduction

The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (C.P.C from hereon now) is that essential procedural law which provides for the procedure for the enforcement of civil rights and liabilities specified under various substantive laws. An integral part to such procedural formalities is the institution of suit against the defendant in the court of law. Taking a glance at the C.P.C, Sec 26 read with Order 4 specifies that a suit has to be instituted by presenting of the plaint. Presentation of plaint is subject to Order VI and Order VII under the C.P.C. wherein Order VII specifically deal with plaint and its formalities such as the particulars to be contained within.

Among other rules under Order VII, Rule 11 states the various grounds upon which the court can reject a plaint. Though it is to be noted here that Rejection of plain is different from return of plaint (Order VII, Rule 10) where the court finds that it does not have the jurisdiction to try the matter before it, the court returns the plaint to be presented to the proper court which holds the rightful jurisdiction. Whenever an application is filed under Order VII, Rule 11, the court before moving forward, needs to evaluate the said application and determine whether the plaint is admissible to be instituted or not. In the case of Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra [1] held that for the purpose of deciding an application under Order VII, Rule 11, only the averments in the plaint are germane. That, pleas taken by defendant in written statement at that stage is wholly irrelevant and that the direction to file a written statement by the trail court without deciding on the application under Order VII, Rule 11 would be nothing but a procedural irregularity.

The grounds upon which court can reject a plaint given under Order VII, Rule 11 are: -

Where Plaint does not disclose a cause of action [Rule 11(a)]

Cause of Action’ though has been mentioned in plenty instances under C.P.C., but isn’t defined under the code. Merriam Webster dictionary defines it as the grounds (such as violation of a right) that entitle a plaintiff to bring a suit [2] . In other words, cause of action is that fact or combination of facts that provide an individual with the right to seek judicial redress against another individual.

In a legal system, a person is provided with certain legal rights and liabilities under the relevant substantive laws. A breach of those rights by another individuals incurs liability on him. Therefore, the moment the right of one person is breached, it gives rise to cause of action whereby the aggrieved party can bring suit in the court and seek redressal. Rule 11(a) essentially lays down that a plaint is liable to be rejected by the court if such a cause of action, upon which the whole suit is founded is not specified therein.

Order II, Rule 2 of C.P.C.make a mention of cause of action in the context that generally, the whole of the claim has to be made under the given cause of action. Because one can’t trouble a party twice for the same cause of action. However, if the plaintiff chooses to not include a part of claim, he can do so at his will but later on can’t sue for the claim he previously omitted or relinquished from the suit. In the case of Alka Gupta v. Narendar Kumar Gupta [3] , preliminary suit was founded upon the cause of action where there was non-payment of the amount under the sale agreement. Whereas, the subsequent suit was founded on the cause of action for non-settlement of records of partnership. Supreme Court observed that Order II, Rule 2 is applicable when both the suits are founded upon a similar cause of action.

The relief claimed in the plaint is undervalued [Rule 11(b)]

Under Rule 11(b), if the plaint presented has the claim undervalued then the court can prescribe a time frame within which the relief claimed has to be correctly valued, (in case) failing in doing so, the court can reject the plaint. Though with the correct valuation, the plaintiff can file a fresh suit under Order VII, Rule 13.

In considering the question whether the suit is properly valued or not, the court must confine its attention to the plaint only and should not look at the other circumstances which may subsequently influence the judgment of the courts as to the true value of the relief prayed for. [4]

Where the relief claimed is properly valued but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped [Rule11(c)]

As the case may be at times, the relief claimed is properly valued but the plaint is written on paper that is insufficiently stamped and authorized. The plaint is liable to be rejected if the person is unable to present the court with the requisite stamp-paper. However, if the requisite court fee is paid within the time extended by the court, the suit or appeal must be treated as instituted from the date of presentation of plaint or memorandum of appeal for the purpose of limitation as well as payment of court fee. [5]   In the case of Midnapur Zamindary Co. v. Secretary of State [6] , the plaintiff was required to submit the amended plaint along with duly stamped paper – but the plaintiff failed in supplying with a stamped paper. To this, the court observed that the plaintiff will not be allowed to amend his plaint and subsequently, the plaint was rejected. In other cases where plaintiff is not able to pay up with the required fee, he may apply to continue the suit as an indigent person.

Where suit is barred by law [Rule 11(d)]

Where it appears that the suits so instituted is barred by any other existent law, the plaint for the same shall be rejected. For instance, where a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution of a decree, is at the time from which the prescribed period is to be reckoned, a minor or insane, or an idiot, he may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after the disability has ceased. [7] If not, then for that reason the plaint shall be rejected.

On another instance, where in a suit against the government, the plaint does not state that a notice as required by Section 80 of the Code has been given, the plaint will be rejected under this clause. [8]

Where plaint is not filed in duplicate [Rule 11(e)]

Under Order 4, Rule 1, plaint is required to be filed in duplicate. In the absence of same, plaint is liable to be rejected by the court.

Where plaint fails to comply with Order VII, Rule 9 [Rule 11(f)]

In case the plaints fails to meet the requirements specified under Order VII, Rule 9 of the code, the plaint shall be rejected.

(Case Law) :Dahiben vs ArvindbhaiKalyanji Bhanushali (Gajra)(D) THR LRS &Ors . [9]

Factual Background

The subject matter in question here was a plot of agricultural land which was under the ownership of plaintiff. The said property was sold to Respondent No, 1 vide registered sale deed, for an amount of Rs. 1,74,02,000, dated 02.07.2009. Subsequently, respondent issued 26 cheques amounting to Rs. 1,74,02,000 as a consideration.

On 01.04.2013, Respondent No. 1 sold the property to Respondent No. 2 & 3 vide registered sale deed, for a total amount of Rs. 2,01,00,000. Thereafter, on 15.12.2014, the plaintiff filed the suit against Respondent No. 1 for the reason being that the consideration to him was not paid entirely by Respondent No. 1 – where only Rs 40,000 had been paid in cheques and the remaining cheques were bogus.It was also pleaded by the plaintiff that the subsequent sale of land to Respondent No. 2 & 3 be cancelled and declared as being illegal, void and ineffective.

Following this,Respondent No. 2 & 3 filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11(a) and (d) for the rejection of plaint on the grounds that; firstly, the plaint didn’t disclose any cause of action and secondly, the suit was barred by limitation since the suit ought to have been instituted within three years of the initial sale deed, i.e. on 02.07.2009, which was not the case here. 

Both the trial court and the High Court of Gujrat allowed the application for rejection of plaint for the reason that the sale deed which was executed on 02.07.2009 explicitly contained the plaintiff acknowledging and admitting of receiving the full consideration amount. Moreover, the execution of sale deed was not disputed and the conveyance was registered in the presence of plaintiff before sub-registrar, therefore the sale deed cannot be said to be void or illegal. In addition to it, since the present suit filed was after 5 years, it was by default barred by limitation period which is of three years form the date of arising of cause of action.

Aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the plaintiff sought redressal before the Supreme Court in an appeal. The apex court concurred with the findings of trial and high court, but here it went a step further and delineated the true essence of Order VII, Rule 11 under the code.

The court citing the case of Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi [10] observed that the purpose of power under Order VII, Rule 11 is to ensure that a litigation which is meaningless and bound to prove abortive should not be allowed to waste judicial time. But the power so given to terminate a civil action is a drastic one and should be strictly adhered to.

With regard to Order VII, Rue 11(a), the court observed that all document provided along with the plaint under Order VII, Rule 14 have to be considered as a whole and a part of plaint. Furthermore, the court stated the test for exercising of power under Order VII, Rule 11 while citing the case of Liverpool & London S.P. & I Assn Ltd. v. M.V. Sea SuccessI &Anr. [11] . The test laid down was, “ Whether a plaint discloses a cause of action or not is essentially a question of fact. But whether it does or does not must be found out from reading the plaint itself. For the said purpose, the averments made in the plaint in their entirety must be held to be correct. The test is as to whether if the averments made in the plaint are taken to be correctin their entirety, a decree would be passed [12] ”.

The court further expounded that it is the substance and not mere form which has to be looked into a plaint. If on a meaningful reading of the plaint, it is found thatthe suit is manifestly vexatious and without any merit, anddoes not disclose a right to sue, the court would be justifiedin exercising the power under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C..If, by clever drafting of the plaint, it has created the illusion of a cause of action, it should be nipped in the bud, so that bogus litigation will end at the earliest stage [13] . The Court must be vigilant against any camouflage or suppression, and determine whether the litigation is utterly vexatious, and an abuse of the process of the court.    

Conclusively, it was held that the averments in the plaint were totally contrary to the contents of the Sale Deed executed on 02.07.2009 which stated that the full consideration amount was paid. If the payment of such a huge amount remained unpaid, it would be inconceivable to think that the plaintiff would remain completely silent for 5 ½ years. The court held that the plaintiff has tried to create an illusory cause of action which is vexatious and meritless and is also overcome by limitation period. It was found that the omission of date of execution of sale deed i.e. 02.07.2009 was deliberate on plaintiff’s part so as to mislead the court which affirms the reason more so that the suit was not filed in the period of limitation. Hence, in lieu of the stated reasons, the Supreme Court rejected the plaint of the grounds mentioned under Order VII, Rule 11 (a) and (d).  

Filed under

• Sakshar Law Associates

Popular articles from this firm

Temporary injunction: a legal snapshot *, caveat under section 148a of civil procedure code *, can an unregistered document be used to protect the possession of the immovable property *, legal requirements mandatory for setting up cosmetic business in india *, understanding of mutation of property in india *.

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected] .

Related practical resources PRO

• How-to guide How-to guide: The legal framework for resolving disputes in England and Wales (UK)
• Checklist Checklist: Considerations prior to issuing court proceedings (UK)
• How-to guide How-to guide: Streamlined sales tax (USA)

Related research hubs

Code of Civil Procedure

Home / code of civil procedure,  19-dec-2023.

• Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)

Introduction

The expression plaint has not been defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) . It can be said to be a statement of claim, a document by presentation of which the suit is instituted. Its object is to state the grounds upon which the assistance of the court is sought by the plaintiff.

• Order VII of CPC contains the provision in relation to plaint.

Rules Regarding the Plaint

• Rule 1 of Order IV lays down that a plaint is to be presented in duplicate to the Court or such officer as may be appointed by the Court.
• Every plaint shall comply with the rules contained in Orders VI and VII of CPC.
• A suit is instituted when the plaint is presented and not when the suit is registered.

Particulars to be Contained in a Plaint

• The plaint shall contain the following particulars: —

(a) The name of the Court in which the suit is brought.

(b) The name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff.

(c) The name, description and place of residence of the defendant, so far as they can be ascertained.

(d) Where the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind, a statement to that effect.

(e) The facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose.

(f) The facts showing that the Court has jurisdiction.

(g) The relief which the plaintiff claims.

(h) Where the plaintiff has allowed a set-off or relinquished a portion of his claim, the amount so allowed, or relinquished.

(i) A statement of the value of the subject matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction and of court fees, so far as the case admits.

Relief to be Specifically Stated in a Plaint

• As per Rule 7 of Order VII, every plaint shall state specifically the relief which the plaintiff claims either simply or in the alternative, and it shall not be necessary to ask for general or other relief which may always be given as the Court may think just to the same extent as if it had been asked for.
• As per Rule 8 of Order VII, where the plaintiff seeks relief in respect of several distinct claims or causes of action founded upon separate and distinct grounds, they shall be stated as far as may be separately and distinctly.

Procedure on Admitting Plaint

• As per Rule 9 of Order VII , where the Court orders that the summons be served on the defendants in the manner provided in Rule 9 of Order V, it will direct the plaintiff to present as many copies of the plaint on plain paper as there are defendants within seven days from the date of such order along with requisite fee for service of summons on the defendants.

Return of Plaint

• Rule 10 deals with the return of plaint. It states that -

(1) Subject to the provisions of rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted.

Explanation. — For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a Court of appeal or revision may direct after setting aside the decree passed in a suit, the return of the plaint under this sub-rule.

(2) Procedure on returning plaint —On returning a plaint, the Judge shall endorse thereon the date of its presentation and return, the name of the party presenting it, and a brief statement of the reasons for returning it.

Rejection of Plaint

• The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases: —

(a) where it does not disclose a cause of action.

(b) where the relief claimed is undervalued , and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within the time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so.

(c) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is returned upon paper insufficiently stamped , and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to supply the requisite stamp-paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so.

(d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law.

(e) where it is not filed in duplicate.

(f) where the plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of rule 9.

Provided that the time fixed by the Court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp-paper shall not be extended unless the Court , for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature from correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp-paper, as the case may be, within the time fixed by the Court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff.

Procedure on Rejecting Plaint

• As per Rule 12 of Order VII, where a plaint is rejected, the Judge shall record an order to that effect with the reasons for such an order.
• In Mayar H.K. Ltd. v. Owners & Parties, Vessel M.V. Fortune Express (2006) , the Supreme Court held that the grounds for rejection of plaint specified in Rule 11 of Order VII of CPC are not exhaustive.
• In Sopan Sukhdeo Sable v. Asst. Charity Commr. (2004) , the Supreme Court held that a plaint cannot be rejected in part and retained in part. It should be rejected as a whole.

1. Particulars to be contained in plaint.— The plaint shall contain the following particulars:—

( a ) the name of the Court in which the suit is brought; ( b ) the name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff; ( c ) the name, description and place of residence of the defendant, so far as they can be ascertained; ( d ) where the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind, a statement to that effect; ( e ) the facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose; ( f ) the facts showing that the Court has jurisdiction; ( g ) the relief which the plaintiff claims; ( h ) where the plaintiff has allowed a set-off or relinquished a portion of his claim, the amount so allowed or relinquished; and ( i ) a statement of the value of the subject-matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction and of court-fees, so far as the case admits.

2. In money suits. —Where the plaintiff seeks the recovery of money, the plaint shall state the precise amount claimed :

But where the plaintiff sues for mesne profits ,  or for an amount which will be found due to him on taking unsettled accounts between him and the defendant, or for movables in the possession of the defendant, or for debts of which the value he cannot, after the exercise of reasonable diligence, estimate, the plaint shall state approximately the amount or value sued for.

2A. Where interest is sought in the suit,  — ( 1 ) Where the plaintiff seeks interest, the plaint shall contain a statement to that effect along with the details set out under sub-rules ( 2 ) and ( 3 ). ( 2 ) Where the plaintiff seeks interest, the plaint shall state whether the plaintiff is seeking interest in

relation to a commercial transaction within the meaning of section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) and, furthermore, if the plaintiff is doing so under the terms of a contract or under an Act, in which case the Act is to be specified in the plaint; or on some other basis and shall state the basis of that.

( 3 ) Pleadings shall also state— ( a ) the rate at which interest is claimed; ( b ) the date from which it is claimed; ( c ) the date to which it is calculated; ( d ) the total amount of interest claimed to the date of calculation; and ( e ) the daily rate at which interest accrues after that date.]

3. Where the subject-matter of the suit is immovable property.— Where the subject-matter of the suit is immovable property, the plaint shall contain a description of the property sufficient to identify it, and, in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement or survey, the plaint shall specify such boundaries or numbers.

4. When plaintiff sues as representative.— Where the plaintiff sues in a representative character the plaint shall show not only that he has an actual existing interest in the subject-matter, but that he has taken the steps (if any) necessary to enable him to institute a suit concerning it.

5. Defendant’s interest and liability to be shown.— The plaint shall show that the defendant is or claims to be interested in the subject-matter, and that he is liable to be called upon to answer the plaintiff’s demand.

6. Grounds of exemption from limitation law.— Where the suit is instituted after the expiration of the period prescribed by the law of limitation, the plaint shall show the ground upon which exemption from such law is claimed :

Provided that the Court may permit the plaintiff to claim exemption from the law of limitation on any ground not set out in the plaint, if such ground is not inconsistent with the grounds set out in the plaint.

7. Relief to be specifically stated.— Every plaint shall state specifically the relief which the plaintiff claims either simply or in the alternative, and it shall not be necessary to ask for general or other relief which may always be given as the Court may think just to the same extent as if it had been asked for. And the same rule shall apply to any relief claimed by the defendant in his written statement.

8. Relief founded on separate grounds.— Where the plaintiff seeks relief in respect of several distinct claims or causes of action founded upon separate and distinct grounds, they shall be stated as far as may be separately and distinctly.

9. Procedure on admitting plaint.— Where the Court orders that the summons be served on the defendants in the manner provided in rule 9 of Order V, it will direct the plaintiff to present as many copies of the plaint on plain paper as there are defendants within seven days from the date of such order along with requisite fee for service of summons on the defendants.

110. Return of plaint.— ( 1 ) Subject to the provisions of rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted.

Explanation.—  For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a Court of appeal or revision may direct, after setting aside the decree passed in a suit, the return of the plaint under this sub-rule.

( 2 )  Procedure on returning plaint.  —On returning a plaint, the Judge shall endorse thereon the date of its presentation and return, the name of the party presenting it, and a brief statement of the reasons for returning it.

10A. Power of Court to fix a date of appearance in the Court where plaint is to be filed after its return.— ( 1 ) Where, in any suit, after the defendant has appeared, the Court is of opinion that the plaint should be returned, it shall, before doing so, intimate its decision to the plaintiff.

( 2 ) Where an intimation is given to the plaintiff under sub-rule  (1),  the plaintiff may make an application to the Court—

( a ) specifying the Court in which he proposes to present the plaint after its return, ( b ) praying that the Court may fix a date for the appearance of the parties in the said Court, and ( c ) requesting that the notice of the date so fixed may be given to him and to the defendant.

( 3 ) Where an application is made by the plaintiff under sub-rule  (2),  the Court shall, before returning the plaint and notwithstanding that the order for return of plaint was made by it on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to try the suit,—

( a ) fix a date for the appearance of the parties in the Court in which the plaint is proposed to be presented, and

( b ) give to the plaintiff and to the defendant notice of such date for appearance. ( 4 ) Where the notice of the date for appearance is given under sub-rule  (3),—

( a ) it shall not be necessary for the Court in which the plaint is presented after its return, to serve the defendant with a summons for appearance in the suit, unless that Court, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs, and

( b ) the said notice shall be deemed to be a summons for the appearance of the defendant in the Court in which the plaint is presented on the date so fixed by the Court by which the plaint was returned.

( 5 ) Where the application made by the plaintiff under sub-rule  (2)  is allowed by the Court, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to appeal against the order returning the plaint.

10B. Power of appellate Court to transfer suit to the proper Court.—  (1)  Where, on an appeal against an order for the return of plaint, the Court hearing the appeal confirms such order, the Court of appeal may, if the plaintiff by an application so desires, while returning the plaint, direct plaintiff to file the plaint, subject to the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), in the Court in which the suit should have been instituted, (whether such Court is within or without the State in which the Court hearing the appeal is situated), and fix a date for the appearance of the parties in the Court in which the plaint is directed to be filed and when the date is so fixed it shall not be necessary for the Court in which the plaint is filed to serve the defendant with the summons for appearance in the suit, unless that Court in which the plaint is filed, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs.

( 2 ) The direction made by the Court under sub-rule  (1)  shall be without any prejudice to the rights of the parties to question the jurisdiction of the Court, in which the plaint is filed, to try the suit.

11. Rejection of plaint.—  The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases: —

( a ) where it does not disclose a cause of action; ( b ) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; ( c ) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is returned upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to supply the requisite stamp-paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; ( d ) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; ( e ) where it is not filed in duplicate; ( f ) where the plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of rule 9:

Provided that the time fixed by the Court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp-paper shall not be extended unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature from correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp-paper, as the case may be, within the time fixed by the Court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff.

12. Procedure on rejecting plaint.— Where a plaint is rejected the Judge shall record an order to that effect with the reasons for such order.

13. Where rejection of plaint does not preclude presentation of fresh plaint.— The rejection of the plaint on any of the grounds hereinbefore mentioned shall not of its own force preclude the plaintiff from presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the same cause of action.

Documents relied on in plaint

14. Production of document on which plaintiff sues or relies.— ( 1 ) Where a plaintiff sues upon a document or relies upon document in his possession or power in support of his claim, he shall enter such documents in a list, and shall produce it in Court when the plaint is presented by him and shall, at the same time deliver the document and a copy thereof, to be filed with the plaint.

( 2 ) Where any such document is not in the possession or power of the plaintiff, he shall, wherever possible, state in whose possession or power it is.

( 3 ) A document which ought to be produced in Court by the plaintiff when the plaint is presented, or to be entered in the list to be added or annexed to the plaint but is not produced or entered accordingly, shall not, without the leave of the Court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the suit.

( 4 ) Nothing in this rule shall apply to document produced for the cross-examination of the plaintiffs witnesses, or handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.

15.  omitted by Act  46  of  1999 s. 17  (w.e.f.  1-7-2002).

16 .  Suits on lost negotiable instruments.— Where the suit is founded upon a negotiable instrument, and it is proved that the instrument is lost, and an indemnity is given by the plaintiff, to the satisfaction of the Court, against the claims of any other person upon such instrument, the Court may pass such decree as it would have passed if the plaintiff had produced the instrument in Court when the plaint was presented, and had at the same time delivered a copy of the instrument to be filed with the plaint.

17. Production of shop-book.—( 1 ) Save in so far as is otherwise provided by the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 (XVIII of 1891), where the document on which the plaintiff sues is an entry in a shop-book or other account in his possession or power, the plaintiff shall produce the book or account at the time of filing the plaint, together with a copy of the entry on which he relies.

( 2 )  Original entry to be marked and returned. —The Court or such officer as it appoints in this behalf, shall forthwith mark the document for the purpose of identification; and, after examining and comparing the copy with the original, shall, if it is found correct, certify it to be so and return the book to the plaintiff and cause the copy to be filed.

18. Omitted by Act  22  of  2002 , s.  8  (w. e. f.  1-7-2002).

- A word from our sponsors -

Most Popular

Nature of suits covered under cpc, res-sub-judice under cpc, res judicata under cpc, restitution under cpc, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Author

Inherent power of court under cpc, execution of judgement and decree under cpc, meaning and object of pleading, general rules of pleading, plaint and written statement under cpc, appearance and non-appearance of parties under cpc, suits by indigent persons under cpc, interpleader suit under cpc, take a deep dive.

• Civil Procedural Code

Section 26 of CPC, 1908

This article is written by Tarini Kalra , a BBA-LL.B. student from Fairfield Institute of Management and Technology affiliated with Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi. The article discusses the institution of a suit under Section 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

It has been published by Rachit Garg.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Have you ever wondered how a civil suit is filed in a civil court? Let’s make our basics clear first. The administration of civil proceedings in India is governed under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). Before filing a civil complaint, it is essential to determine the court’s jurisdiction under Section 9 and the place of suing under Section 18 of the CPC. The initial step of the procedure of a civil suit is the institution of the suit under Section 26 of the CPC. The present article provides a detailed study of the provisions of the institution of the suit under Section 26 of the CPC. 

What is a suit

The term ‘suit’ is not defined under the CPC, 1908. The Black Law’s Dictionary, 4th edition defines suit as “ A generic term, of comprehensive signification, and applies to any proceeding by one person or persons against another or others in a court of justice in which the plaintiff pursues, in such court, the remedy which the law affords him for the redress of an injury or the enforcement of a right, whether at law or in equity .”  A suit is a civil process initiated by the filing of a plaint seeking to enforce civil or substantive rights against the state or a person. A suit results in a decree. There can be no decree without a suit.

In the case of Ethiopian Airlines v. Ganesh Narain Saboo (2011), the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the term ‘suit’ is a general term that encompasses all actions to be taken by a person to enforce a legal right that has been vested in them by law.

In the landmark case of Hansraj Gupta & Others v. Dehra Dun-Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd. (1932), the Privy Council held that a civil proceeding is instituted by the presentation of a plaint. 

Suit under the Limitation Act, 1963

The Limitation Act, 1963 governs the laws regulating the limitation of suits and other procedures. An appeal or an application is not considered a suit under Section 2(l) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, deals with the extension of the prescribed time frame in certain circumstances. It states that any appeal or application may be allowed even after the limitation period has passed if the appellant establishes to the court that they could not file the appeal or application during the limitation period. If the court is satisfied, the delay in submitting the appeal or application can be excused, regardless of whether the party is a state or a private entity. Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, does not apply to suits. 

In the case of F. Liansanga v. Union of India (2022), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the authority to exempt delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to suits.

Section 9 of the Limitation Act, 1963 outlines the continuous running of time. When the cause of action accrues, the time runs out. It states that once a period of limitation starts, no subsequent disability or inability can stop it. It applies solely to suits and applications and does not apply to appeals unless the matter falls under one of the exceptions set out in the Act. Section 9 applies when the cause of action or right to petition the court exists on the date of the application.

Essentials of a suit

Parties to the suit.

There must be at least two opposing parties: the plaintiff who files the suit for claiming relief and the defendant against whom the plaintiff files for the claim. There is no restriction on the number on either side. Every suit is instituted by the presentation of a plaint. A plaint must be filed by the plaintiff, a representative, a recognised agent, or an advocate for the plaintiff. 

Order I, Rule 1 of the CPC, outlines the joinder of the plaintiffs to the suit. All persons may join as plaintiffs if any claim to relief in a single suit arises from the same act or transaction or a series of acts or transactions alleged to exist jointly, severally, or in the alternative, or where any common question of law or fact arises. 

Order I, Rule 3 of the CPC outlines the joinder of the defendants to the suits. When any claim to relief is alleged to exist against defendants arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions, or when any common question of law or fact would emerge if separate cases were launched against the defendants, all people may join as defendants in a suit.

A misjoinder occurs when a party to the lawsuit is unintentionally added. It is deemed a  misjoinder when a party is added but has nothing to do with the dispute. When a party to the suit is not added to the suit, then it is a non-joinder. Order I, Rule 9 of the CPC states that no suit shall be dismissed on the grounds of the misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. This Rule does not apply to necessary parties interpreted as non-joinder.

Cause of action 

A cause of action is the set of reasons on the basis of which a lawsuit is instituted in court. It is a set of facts or allegations that constitutes grounds for filing a lawsuit. It includes all the facts pertaining to rights and their infringement. Order II, Rule 2 of the CPC states that a cause of action is essential, and a plaint must mention the cause of action if it is to be instituted as a suit.

In the case of Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association v. Union of India & Ors. (2000), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the phrase “cause of action” had a judicially established meaning. It refers to the conditions surrounding the violation of the right or the direct cause of the conduct. In a broader sense, it refers to the conditions required for the suit to be maintained, which include not just the violation of the right, but the violation combined with the right itself. and summarised the phrase to all facts that the plaintiff would have to establish if he were to be traversed to maintain his claim to the Court’s judgement. The cause of action includes every truth that must be proven, as opposed to every piece of evidence that must be given to substantiate each fact.

Subject matter 

The set of facts or details about a movable or immovable property that gives rise to a civil dispute to claim remedies is referred to as the subject matter.

The relief claimed by the plaintiff 

Relief is a legal remedy available to the plaintiff for a violation of legal rights by the defendant. No remedy will be granted by a court unless the parties to the complaint request it. There are two types of relief: specific and alternative. Specific relief is governed under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 .

Institution of a suit under Section 26 CPC

The primary step of civil litigation is the institution of a suit. The institution of suits is governed under Section 26 of the CPC, read along with Order IV , CPC. 

According to Section 26 of the CPC:

• Every lawsuit must be initiated by the filing of a plaint or in any other manner as prescribed by law. 
• An affidavit must be used to substantiate the facts in every plaint. The affidavit must comply with the specifications mentioned under Order VI , Rule 15A .

Order IV of the CPC outlines the commencement of a suit by plaint. It states that: 

• Every suit must be instituted by the presentation of a plaint to the Court or any official designated on its behalf. 
• Every plaint must comply with the rules outlined in Orders VI and VII . 
• A plaint is not considered to be duly instituted unless it complies with the criteria stated under sub-rules (1) and (2).

Order IV, Rule 1 , must be read with Section 26 of the CPC in the extension of the law as provided in the Section. According to this regulation, a lawsuit can only be considered adequately commenced if it is delivered to the court directly or to a proper official designated in this capacity with a plaint or in duplicate. The requirements outlined in Orders VI and VII must be followed by the plaint.

Section 80 of the CPC, requires that a legal notice be served before the filing of a suit if the defendant in the suit is the government or a public officer. However, only some civil suits require serving a legal notice. In certain scenarios, advocates serve legal notice before the filing of civil cases to inform the defendant that the sender of the notice is making the final attempt to resolve the dispute. It is primarily used as a precautionary measure.

The procedural aspect of the institution of suits includes the following:

• Preparation of a plaint 
• Choosing the appropriate place of suing 
• Presentation of the plaint

Plaint – a necessary tool for the institution of a suit

A plaint is a legal document in which a plaintiff pleads to the court for restitution for any legal injury inflicted by the defendant. There is no strict format for drafting a plaint. Order VII , Rule 1   of the CPC, specifies rules about the particulars to be included in the plaint are provided. A plaint must include the following:

• Name of the court where the suit is filed;
• Plaintiff’s name, description, and address;
• Name, description and address of the defendant, as it can be ascertained;
• A statement to that effect is required when either the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind;
• Facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose;
• Facts proving the jurisdiction of the court;
• Relief which the plaintiff requests to claim;
• If the plaintiff has approved a set-off or waived a portion of his claim, the amount allowed or waived; and
• A statement of the value of the subject matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction and court costs, to the extent permitted as per the case.

Rejection of a plaint

Order VII Rule 11 outlines specific grounds for the rejection of a plaint. The grounds for rejection of the plaint are: 

• No cause of action is disclosed;
• When the remedy sought is undervalued and the plaintiff fails to update the valuation after being ordered by the court to do so within a set period;
• When the remedy sought is correctly valued but the plaint is insufficiently stamped and the plaintiff is requested by the court to provide the necessary stamp paper within a deadline determined by the Court but fails to do so;
• Where the statement in the plaint suggests that the suit is prohibited by any law;
• If it is not filed in duplicate;
• When the plaintiff does not comply with provisions of Rule 9.

In the case of Kavita Tushir v. Pushpraj Dalal (2022), the Delhi High Court rejected the application of a plaint stating that there could be no piecemeal rejection of the plaint. “Piecemeal rejection” of a plaint means that a plaint must be rejected as a whole, not partly.

Appropriate place of suing 

Section 15 to Section 20 of the CPC deal with the place of suing. 

According to Section 15, the plaintiff must file the suit in court with the lowest competency level.

Section 16 states that suits should be instituted within the local jurisdiction where the property is located in the case of:

• Recovery of immovable property with or without rent or profits;
• Partition of immovable property;
• Foreclosure, sale or redemption of a mortgage or charge upon immovable property, 
• Determination of any other right or interest in immovable property;
• Compensation for damage to immovable property;
• Recovery of movable property under distraint or attachment.

When a suit is filed for relief or compensation for a wrongful act to immovable property by a defendant or any other person on his behalf and the relief can be obtained through his personal attendance, the suit may be filed in a court within the local jurisdiction where: 

• the property is located;
• the defendant resides, carries on business or personal for gains.

This concept is based on the legal maxim “ equity acts in personam ” which means “ equity applies to a person rather than a property .”

Section 17 discusses the jurisdiction of suits for immovable property located within the jurisdiction of different courts. When immovable properties are located in separate jurisdictions, the suit may be filed in any court within the local jurisdiction where any portion of the property is located, provided that the cause of action for both properties is the same.

In the case of Shivnarayan v. Maniklal (2019), the  Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that under Section 17 of the CPC, the term ‘property’ might refer to more than one property. Suits brought for different properties can be brought in any court with jurisdiction if the cause of action is the same.

Section 18 outlines the place of institution of the suit where the jurisdiction of courts is uncertain. If there is uncertainty about the jurisdiction of the institution of a suit of immovable property between two or more courts, then a statement must be recorded to that effect by any of the courts if the court is satisfied with the uncertainty and proceeds to entertain or dispose of any suit relating to that property, and its decree in the suit shall have the same effect as if the property were situated within the local limits of its jurisdiction, provided that the institution of the suit is in a competent court with respect to the nature and valuation of the suit to exercise jurisdiction.

When a statement is not recorded pursuant to Section 18(1) and an objection is brought before an Appellate or Revisional Court that a decree or order in a suit relating to such property was made by a court not having jurisdiction where the property is situated, they shall not allow the objection unless they presume there was no reasonable ground for uncertainty as to the court having jurisdiction at the time of the institution of the suit and there has been a consequent failure of justice.

Section 19 deals with suits for compensation of wrongful activity to a person for movable property. When a suit is for compensation for the wrong done to a person or to movable property, the plaintiff has a choice as to the institution of the suit within the local limits of the jurisdiction where the defendant resides, carries on business, or works for personal gain, or within the jurisdiction where the property is situated.

Section 20 is a residuary provision of a place of suing. It deals with the institution of suits where the defendant resides, carries on business, works for personal gain, or where the cause of action wholly or partly arises within the local jurisdiction of the court. When there is more than one defendant at the time of the commencement of the suit, the suit can be instituted where any of the defendant or defendants resides, carries on business, or works for personal gain, provided that the plaintiff obtains leave from the court. If the defendants consent to the place of institution of the suit, then there is no need to obtain leave from the court. 

Presentation of plaint

Order VII Rule 9 specifies the procedures for admitting a plaint. It states that the court orders that the summons be served on the defendants in accordance with Order V, Rule 9 , and that the plaintiff must submit as many copies of the plaint as there are defendants, along with the prescribed fee for serving the summons on the defendants, within seven days of the date of such an order. The plaintiff shall pay the requisite fee for the serving of the summons on the defendants within the time fixed by the court. When a plaintiff sues a defendant or defendants, the plaintiff must declare in what capacity the defendant or defendants are being sued in order to act in a representative capacity. In order to make these statements consistent with the plaint, the plaintiff may seek leave from the court. The chief ministerial officer of the court shall sign such lists, copies, or statements if he considers them to be correct upon investigation.

Jurisdiction of courts with respect to suits of civil nature

Jurisdiction is primarily determined by the following factors: 

• Valuation of suit;
• Territorial boundaries of a court;
• The subject matter of court.

The kinds of jurisdiction are mentioned as follows:

Pecuniary Jurisdiction 

The term ‘pecuniary’ refers to money. It empowers the courts to determine matters of monetary subject matter. A court has jurisdiction over those suits where the value of the suit does not exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction. Presently, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district court is up to Rs 2 crore .

Territorial jurisdiction 

Each court has geographical boundaries outside of which it cannot function and exercise authority. The government alters these restrictions. The district judge must exercise authority within the district. The High Court only has jurisdiction over the state where it is located.

Subject matter jurisdiction

The power granted to a court to hear cases involving a specific subject is subject matter jurisdiction. The courts cannot hear cases whose subject matter falls outside of their jurisdiction.

Concurrent jurisdiction

Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two or more courts from different legal systems have jurisdiction over the same matter.

Exclusive jurisdiction

The power to hear a case before one court or tribunal is called exclusive jurisdiction. No other court or authority may deliver a judgement or decide the case or class of cases. 

Appellant jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction refers to a court’s ability to hear cases from subordinate courts. While exercising its appellate jurisdiction, the superior court may quash the lower court’s decision, order the lower court to hear the case again, order the lower court to take additional evidence, and make any other order it deems appropriate.

Original jurisdiction

The power of a court to hear or try a case in the first instance is referred to as original jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction requires that a particular type of case be initiated and tried in the lowest court in the hierarchy before proceeding to the next court in that hierarchy if necessary. Within the guidelines set forth by the law, a court with original jurisdiction may hear the matter, reach various findings, and issue orders.

Special jurisdiction 

The courts are granted the authority to hear cases of a specific nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled in Harshad S. Mehta & Ors v. State of Maharashtra (2001) that the special court has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate a matter, which is given to the Special Court by the act or the statute that established the court and not by committal.

Legal jurisdiction

In legal jurisdiction, all courts are administered by the law of the land, including statutes, precedents, customs, equity, justice, and good conscience.

Scope and applicability of Section 26

In a civil lawsuit, the burden of proof lies on the plaintiff. The plaintiff must establish that the accusations against the defendant are true and the defendant is liable for damages. A plaint must include all required information and supporting documentation. Additionally, the necessary court expenses should be included with the plaint. A small fraction of the overall claim or suit value is used as court costs. The Court Fees Act, 1870 , and the Stamp Act, 1899 specify the required amounts of court fees and stamp duty depending on the type of suit.

Section 9 of the CPC deals with the jurisdiction of courts to try all suits of a civil nature except those suits in which the cognizance is not expressly or impliedly barred.

Suits expressly or impliedly barred

Suits expressly barred: .

A suit barred by a statute in effect is a suit expressly barred. A competent legislature may limit the civil court’s ability to hear a certain kind of civil suit, provided that it does so without violating any constitutional provisions and remains within the purview of the legislative authority granted to it. As a result, when a suit is specifically excluded by the law currently in effect, it cannot be filed.

Suits impliedly barred: 

A suit is said to be impliedly barred if it is prohibited by general legal principles. Based on public policy, even civil lawsuits are similarly excluded from civil court jurisdiction. A person who needs a remedy in a different form than what is provided by statute is therefore denied when a specific remedy is provided by statute.

Formalities after the institution of a suit

The beginning and institution of the suit before a court or such officer appointed in this regard are outlined in Order IV Rules 1 and 2.

The issue of summons to the defendant or defendants is covered under Section 27 . A summons to appear and answer the claim is sent to the defendant on the day that is not more than thirty days after the suit has been instituted, and it is served in the manner specified.

Section 28 deals with serving summons to defendants who are residents of other states. A summons must be sent to the court in another state in compliance with the rules in force in that state. The court to which such a summons is conveyed must act as though it has issued the summons itself. The court must return the summons, along with a record of its proceedings, to the court that issued the summons.

When the summons sent for service in another state is in a language other than the language of the record, a translation of the record must be supplied:

• The translation must be provided in Hindi if the court issues the summons in that language;
• Where the record is in a language other than Hindi or English, the translation must be given in Hindi or English and delivered with the record.

Section 29 deals with serving the foreign summons. Summons and other legal documents must be produced by:

• Any Civil or Revenue Court established in India, regardless of where the CPC does not apply; 
• Any Civil or Revenue Court established or maintained by the Central Government outside of India, or
• Any other Civil or Revenue Court outside of India to which the Central Government has declared the provisions of this section to apply by notification in the Official Gazette can be delivered to the Courts in the regions covered by this Code and served as if they were summons issued by those courts.

Section 31 addresses witness summons. The provisions of Sections 27, 28, and 29 shall apply to any summons to produce documents or other material objects or to provide testimony.

Every right has a remedy, or “ Ubi jus, ibi remedium ,” which is one of the fundamental principles of the legal system. A plaintiff may file a civil lawsuit to obtain compensation for losses the defendant has caused. A plaint must include all relevant information and serves as the first step in the documentary process of the institution of civil litigation. However, the onus of proof is on the plaintiff as the plaintiff files the suit and states the facts and legal grounds. The plaintiff must convince the court and support every allegation made against the defendant by presenting the true facts and reasonable grounds for the institution of the suit.

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

Can a suit be filed without any cause of action.

No, a suit cannot arise without a cause of action.

When can a plaint be rejected?

A court can reject suo motu . A plaint can be rejected at any stage of the suit but before the verdict is rendered.

Can a plaint be partially rejected?

A plaint cannot be partially rejected. However, in the case of Dr Sanjiv Bansal v. Dr Manish Bansal (2022), the Delhi High Court remarked that Order VII, Rule 11(d) of the CPC, 1908, specifies that a plaint shall be rejected where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law, and Order VI, Rule 16 of the CPC, allows the court to strike out any part of the pleading at any point in the proceedings that appear to be an abuse of the court’s procedure or is inappropriate, scandalous, unreasonable, offensive, or harmful.

What is the remedy available for the rejection of the plaint? 

 A fresh suit can be instituted by the plaintiff under Order VII, Rule 13 .

• https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/judge%2Cfamilycourtworkshop.pdf  
• https://lawtimesjournal.in/meaning-and-essentials-of-suits/  
• https://www.estartindia.com/knowledge-hub/blog/summary-suits-under-cpc  
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/draft-suit-points-remember/  
• https://lawfaculty.in/kinds-of-jurisdiction-code-of-civil-procedure-cpc/  
• https://www.writinglaw.com/types-of-jurisdiction/  
• https://sherianajamii.com/types-of-jurisdiction  
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/an-in-depth-analysis-of-section-9-of-the-cpc/#:~:text=A%20suit%20is%20said%20to,than%20is%20given%20by%20statute.%E2%80%9D  

Students of  Lawsikho courses  regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on  Instagram  and subscribe to our  YouTube  channel for more amazing legal content.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Plaint format under cpc, brijendra singh vs. state of m.p. and anr. (2008)   , gaurav nagpal vs. sumedha nagpal (2009)         , leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

International Opportunities in Contract Drafting

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

Plaints: A concise guide to CPC Proceedings

In the legal realm, the plaint serves as the foundation of a civil lawsuit. It is a formal document submitted by the plaintiff to initiate legal proceedings and seek relief from the court. However, not all plaints are accepted without scrutiny. 

A valid plaint must comply with several requirements mandated by the legal system, and if they are not met, the plaint may be rejected. This crucial stage guarantees procedural observance, protects the integrity of the legal system, and stops the court system from being overburdened by unfounded or flawed claims.

A valid plaint is more than just a piece of paper; it represents the careful adherence to legal standards and the respect for due process. Let’s delve deeper into what makes a plaint valid and why this initial step is so pivotal in the realm of civil litigation.

The plaintiff's initial chance to argue their case in court is through the plaint. It provides a summary of the relevant facts, the complaint, and the requested remedies. The framework for the entire legal process is defined by this initial submission. 

A well-drafted plaint provides a clear and concise narrative of the plaintiff's claims, aiding the court in understanding the dispute and the relief sought. Conversely, a deficient plaint can lead to confusion, delay, and even injustice.

Plaint is discussed in Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 . Order VII specifically deals with the particulars of a plaint. It outlines the essential requirements that a plaint must fulfill to be considered valid and maintainable in a civil court.

Order VII of the CPC serves as a safeguard against frivolous or improperly formatted claims. It ensures that plaintiffs meet certain criteria before their cases proceed to trial, thereby protecting the efficiency and integrity of the legal system. 

ESSENTIALS OF A PLAINT

The essential parts of a plaint are crucial to ensure clarity and procedural adherence in civil lawsuits: 

Heading and Title: This includes the name of the court where the suit is filed, the names and descriptions of the plaintiff and defendant, along with their places of residence. It establishes jurisdiction and identifies the parties involved.

Body of the Plaint: This presents the facts and grounds on which the plaintiff is basing their claim. It should provide a clear and concise narrative of the events leading to the dispute, supporting the legal basis for the relief sought.

Relief Claimed: The plaint must specify the exact relief or remedies sought by the plaintiff. This could include recovery of debts, damages, specific performance of a contract, injunctions, etc. Each relief should be separately and clearly stated.

Verification: The plaint needs to be verified by the plaintiff or someone with knowledge of the facts stated in the plaint. This verification confirms the truthfulness of the claims made in the plaint. 

In essence, these components collectively form the backbone of a valid plaint, ensuring that the court and the parties involved have a clear understanding of the case and the relief sought, thus facilitating fair and efficient legal proceedings.

PARTICULARS OF A PLAINT

Order VII Rule 1 delineates the essential particulars required in a plaint. These specifics include:

Court Name: Identification of the court where the suit is filed.

 Plaintiff's Details: Name, description, and place of residence of the plaintiff.

Defendant's Details: Name, description, and place of residence of the defendant, to the extent ascertainable.

Minor or Unsound Mind: Declaration if either party (plaintiff or defendant) is a minor or of unsound mind.

Cause of Action: Facts constituting the cause of action and its timing.

Jurisdictional Facts: Facts demonstrating the court's jurisdiction over the matter.

Claimed Relief: The specific relief sought by the plaintiff.

Set-off or Relinquishment: Mention of any allowed set-off or relinquished claim portion by the plaintiff.

Subject Matter Value: Statement of the subject matter's value for jurisdiction and court fee purposes, where applicable.

REJECTION OF PLAINT

Order VII Rule XI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 addresses the procedure for the rejection of a plaint. This rule serves as a distinct and important recourse where a court is empowered to dismiss a lawsuit summarily, without the need for evidence or a full trial. 

By doing so, it optimizes time and resources for both the court and the involved parties, thereby enhancing the efficiency of the judicial process. Typically, this provision is invoked when the plaint is clearly deficient or when it is apparent from the pleadings that the suit lacks merit.

The rejection of a plaint can occur under the following circumstances:

Non-disclosure of Cause of Action: If a plaint fails to disclose the cause of action, it is subject to rejection. The court's decision is solely based on the content of the plaint.

Undervaluation of Relief: When the relief claimed by the plaintiff is undervalued, and corrections are not made within the specified time, the court can reject the plaint.

Insufficient Stamp Duty: If the relief claimed is properly valued but the paper lacks sufficient stamp duty, and the plaintiff fails to rectify this within the court's deadline, the plaint may be rejected.

Barred by Law: If the plaint indicates that the suit is legally barred, it will be rejected by the court.

Failure to File in Duplicate: The plaint must be filed in duplicate; non-compliance leads to rejection.

Non-Compliance with Statutory Provisions: Failure to adhere to the provisions of Rule 9 or other statutory requirements may also lead to plaint rejection.

MODES OF REJECTION OF PLAINT

Defendant's Application: At any stage of the legal proceedings, the defendant can file an application challenging the validity of the plaint. This can be in the form of an interlocutory application, which is a legal request made during the course of a lawsuit.

Suo Moto Rejection: According to Order VII Rule 1, a court has the authority to reject a plaint on its own motion (suo moto) if it finds that the conditions outlined in the rule are not fulfilled. This means that the court can take action without waiting for a formal application from the defendant or any party.

RETURN OF PLAINT

Rule 10 of Order VII deals with the return of a plaint in legal proceedings. It states that the plaint can be returned to be presented to the appropriate court at any stage of the suit, as per Rule 10A, if applicable.

The Explanation clarifies that even a Court of appeal or revision, after setting aside a decree in a suit, has the authority to direct the return of the plaint as per this sub-rule.

Upon returning a plaint, the Judge is required to endorse on it the date of its initial presentation, the name of the presenting party, and a concise explanation of why it is being returned.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RETURN AND REJECTION OF PLAINT

Return of plaint under Order 7 Rule 10: This occurs when a court, at any stage of the suit, determines that it does not have the jurisdiction to try the case. In such situations, the court is obligated to return the plaint to the plaintiff for presentation to the court with the rightful jurisdiction to hear the matter. Essentially, it’s about ensuring that the case is heard in the appropriate legal forum.

Rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11: This provision allows a court to reject a plaint based on specific grounds outlined in the rule. These grounds typically relate to procedural deficiencies or substantive issues with the plaint itself. For example, a plaint may be rejected if it is not properly stamped, if it does not disclose a cause of action, or if it is frivolous or vexatious. Unlike the return of plaint, which is based on jurisdictional concerns, the rejection of plaint focuses on the adequacy and validity of the plaint as per procedural and substantive legal requirements.

IMPORTANT CASES

Meenakshi Sundaram Chettiar vs. Venkatachalam Chettiar (1979)- As per the Supreme Court ruling the relief requested in the plaint was deemed inadequate and undervalued, the court thus rejected the plaint. The court stated that the plaintiffs must ensure that their valuation of relief aligns with the case's facts.

Midnapur Zamindary Co. v. Secretary of State- the plaintiff failed to submit the revised plaint with the necessary stamp duty. As a result, the court refused the plaintiff’s request to amend the plaint and dismissed the case. In contrast, in other instances, if a plaintiff can't afford the fees, they may apply to continue the case as an indigent person.

R.K. Roja v. U.S. Rayadu & Anr. (2016)- The Supreme Court established that an application under Order VII Rule 11 can be submitted at any stage, but once filed, the court must address and resolve it before continuing with the trial.

T.V. Satyapal v. T. Arivandandam (1977)- the apex court determined that the contents of a plaint must be considered both formally and substantively meaningful. However, if a plaint is filed in such a way that it appears to establish a cause of action, even though closer examination reveals that no such cause exists, the court is empowered under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC to take appropriate action.

Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali (2020)- The Supreme Court said that the court’s authority to dismiss a civil action is a significant one, and the conditions outlined in Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC must be strictly followed. This rule places the responsibility on the court to evaluate whether the plaint establishes a cause of action by examining the averments in the plaint along with the supporting documents, or whether the suit is legally barred. The main objective of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC is to prevent the unnecessary prolongation of legal proceedings when a plaint fails to disclose a valid cause of action. In such instances, it becomes imperative to swiftly end the baseless litigation to avoid wasting judicial time.

Mayar H.K. Ltd. v. Owners & Parties, Vessel M.V. Fortune Express (2006)- the Supreme Court clarified that the reasons for rejecting a plaint as outlined in Rule 11 of Order VII of the CPC are not limited to those explicitly listed.

Sopan Sukhdeo Sable v. Asst. Charity Commr. (2004)- the Supreme Court emphasized that a plaint cannot be partially rejected and partially retained. Instead, it must be either wholly accepted or wholly rejected by the court.

Share this News

More articles, wrongful gain and wrongful loss: legal perspectives and implications, understanding the indian partnership act, 1932, the law commission of india: a pillar of legal evolution, the hema committee report: an analysis, investigation and trial in ndps cases: a comprehensive guide, latest news, section 498a and domestic violence act as among the most abused laws : sc, delhi court extends arvind kejriwal's judicial custody till september 2, gram panchayats cannot levy tax on motor vehicles, madhya pradesh hc rules, co-owner cannot transfer entire property without completing partition by metes and bounds: sc, gyanvapi row | hindu side requests court approval for asi survey digging.

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy

• Know the Law
• Explainer : What Is Order 7 Rule 11...

Explainer : What Is Order 7 Rule 11 CPC? When Can Plaint Be Rejected?

Paras ahuja.

29 May 2022 3:40 AM GMT

The presentation of a plaint, i.e. the pleading of the plaintiff in a suit; marks the institution of a civil suit. The Civil Procedure Code, 1908, provides for the remedy of rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, on certain specifically states grounds. Order VII Rule 11 provides: "Court shall reject a plaint: (a) where it does not disclose a cause of action; (b) where the relief...

The presentation of a plaint, i.e. the pleading of the plaintiff in a suit; marks the institution of a civil suit. The Civil Procedure Code, 1908, provides for the remedy of rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, on certain specifically states grounds. Order VII Rule 11 provides:

"Court shall reject a plaint:

(a) where it does not disclose a cause of action;

(b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so;

(c) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to supply the requisite stamp paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so;

(d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law;

(e) where it is not filed in duplicate;

(f) where the plaintiff fails comply with the provision of Rule 9.

Provided that the time fixed by the court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp papers shall not be extended unless the court, for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature from correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp papers, as the case may be within the time fixed by the court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff."

Rejection of plaint weeds about frivolous, vexatious and improper plaints at the very outset, thus, saving judicial time and resources. It was observed in the case of Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi that the entire purpose of conferment of such powers under O7 R 11 is to ensure that a litigation, which is meaningless and bound to prove abortive is not permitted to occupy the time of the courts, and exercise the mind of the respondent. Such a remedy is necessary to put an end to the sham litigation, so further judicial time is not wasted, as observed by the Supreme Court in Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusal.

• Grounds of Rejection of Plaint

Rule 11 provides for 6 grounds for rejection of plaint, as follows:

• Non-Disclosure of Cause of Action

Cause of action was defined in the case of Bloom Dekor Ltd. vs. Subhash Himatlal Desai & Ors to mean " every fact, which, if traversed, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to a judgment of the Court" The court observed in the case of Church Of Christ Charitable Trust vs M/S. Ponniamman Educational Trust that cause of action refers to a bundle of facts which it is necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to succeed in the suit." A plaint that doesn't disclose a cause of action has no prospect of succeeding, it is therefore, in the common interest of the parties and also judicial time, that such a plaint be rejected Supreme Court in Raj Narain Sarin (dead) through L.Rs. Vs. Lakshmi Devi r also observed that where the plaint does not disclose a clear right to sue, it is liable for rejection.

More recently, in Colonel Shrawan Kumar Jaipuriyar @ Sarwan Kumar Jaipuriyar v. Krishna Nandan Singh And Another , court had rejected the plaint on the ground that it didn't disclose a clear right to sue.

• Plaint is under-valued

Under-valuation of the plaint would have the impact of circumvention around the law on court fees and also the rules related to pecuniary jurisdiction of the court

Herein, court is empowered to grant extra time to correct the error of under-valuation, and if the plaintiff doesn't correct even after that, then even in such a situation, by virtue of the proviso to Rule 11, court may further grant extra time in exceptional situations.

• Plaint is insufficiently stamped

To ensure compliance with the mandate of Stamp Act, as well as to secure the revenue interests of the state, this ground provides for rejection in case plaint is insufficiently stamped.

However, as in case of under-valued plaint, court may grant extension of time here also under Rule 11(c) and the Proviso.

• Relief claimed is barred by law

In a case where the relied claimed is barred by law, the plaint shall be rejected by the court. The most common example of the same is seen in cases where the plaintiff without following the mandatory requirement of 2-month prior notice under Section 80CPC [herein, a two month-prior notice is to be given to the government before instituting suit against it], is presented, the same is liable to be rejected. In 2022, the Supreme Court in the case of M/S Frost International Limited v. M/S Milan Developers And Builders (P) Limited & Anr observed that the plaint which, in essence, sought the relief of injuncting the defendant from instituting criminal prosecution against the plaintiff under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , is liable to be rejected on the ground that such relief is barred by law under Section 41, Specific Relief Act, 1963.

• When plaint is not filed in duplicate

Order IV Rule 1(1) requires that a plaint should be filed in duplicate. If this requirement is not fulfilled, court has to reject the plaint.

• Non-Compliance with Rule 9

Rule 9 provides that the plaintiff shall endorse on the plaint, or annex thereto, a list of the documents (if any) which he has produced along with it; and, if the plaint is admitted, shall present, within such time as may be fixed by the Court or extended by it from time to time, as many copies on plain paper of the plaint as there are defendants, unless the Court by reason of the length of the plaint or the number of the defendants, or for any other sufficient reason, permits him to present a like number of concise statements of the nature of the claim made, or of the relief claimed in the suit, in which case he shall present such statements. It further provides that the plaintiff shall, within the time fixed by the Court or extended by it under sub-rule (1), pay the requisite fee for the service of summons on the defendants.

In case this is not complied with, the plaint shall be rejected.

• OVII R1: Mandatory power of the court, not a matter of discretion

The Supreme Court in its 2020 decision of Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali (Gajra)(D) Thru Lrs observed that the plaint "shall" be rejected if any of the grounds specified in clause (a) to (e) are made out. If the Court finds that the plaintiff does not disclose a cause of action, or that the suit is barred by any law, the Court has no option, but to reject the plaintiff." The provisions of Order VI Rule 11 are therefore not discretionary, but mandatory. If the plaint attracts any of the clauses under Rule 11, the court cannot of its discretion choose to note reject it.

• Basis of decision as to rejection of a plaint: Can Written Statement be referred to?

In the case of Kamala & others v. KT Eshwara , the two judge bench of the Supreme Court observed that the conclusion as to rejection of plaint must be drawn from the averments made in the plaint. The bench observed that that would be relevant for invoking clause (d) of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code are the averments made in the plaint. For that purpose, there cannot be any addition or subtraction. In Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra , the Supreme Court also observed that: "It is clear that in order to consider Order 7 Rule 11, the court has to look into the averments in the plaint and the same can be exercised by the trial court at any stage of the suit. It is also clear that the averments in the written statement are immaterial and it is the duty of the Court to scrutinize the averments/pleas in the plaint. In other words, what needs to be looked into in deciding such an application are the averments in the plaint. At that stage, the pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement are wholly irrelevant and the matter is to be decided only on the plaint averments."

More recently, in the landmark decision of Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat & Ors, the Supreme Court, while deciding the issue of "res judicata as a ground of rejection of plaint" observed that to reject a plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by any law, only the averments in the plaint will have to be referred to and the defense made by the defendant in the suit must not be considered while deciding the merits of the application.

Moreover , as held by the Supreme Court in its 2022 decision of Biswanath Banik v. Sulanga Bose, the Court has to consider and read the averments in the plaint as a whole. Laying reliance on the decision in Ram Prakash Gupta v. Rajiv Kumar Gupta , it observed that rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 by reading only few lines and passages of the plaint and ignoring the other relevant parts of the plaint is impermissible.

• Rejection of Plaint and "Mixed Question of Law and Fact"

The major chunk of jurisprudence around Order VII Rule 11, revolves around Rule 11(d), which states that plaint shall be rejected if it the relief claimed is barred by law. Now in cases whether the determination of bar of law is a 'mixed question of law and fact', the rejection of plaint is not ordered by the court. The reason for the same is simple. Since a mixed question of law and fact cannot be decided on the sole basis of a plaint, and requires the court to consider evidence, rejection is not ordered in such as only averments in the plaint are to be considered to decide the question of rejection of plaint.

Two most common examples of this peculiar scenario of "mixed questions of law and fact" are bar of res judicata and the bar of limitation.

A recent example for the same can be seen in the case of Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemanth Vithal Kamat & Ors. where court was dealing with res Judicata as a ground for rejection of plaint. It observed in the judgment that to determine whether a suit is barred by res judicata, it is necessary that "(i) the 'previous suit' is decided, (ii) the issues in the subsequent suit were directly and substantially in issue in the former suit; (iii) the former suit was between the same parties or parties through whom they claim, litigating under the same title; and (iv) that these issues were adjudicated and finally decided by a court competent to try the subsequent suit".

The bench observed that since an adjudication of the plea of res judicata requires consideration of the pleadings, issues and decision in the 'previous suit', such a plea will be beyond the scope of Order 7 Rule 11 (d), where only the statements in the plant will have to be perused."

In the landmark case of Smt. Sita Shripad Narvekar and ors v. Auduth Timblo , it was observed in this context that "for deciding the application under Order VII Rule 11 (d) CPC, the averments in the plaint are to be examined without any additions or subtractions. Res judicata being a mixed question of law and fact, which the Court will have to examine based on evidence adduced by both the parties on merits of the claim.

Another common example of 'mixed question of law and fact' can be seen in the case of bar of limitation. The question of limitation is more often than not, a mixed question of law and fact. In this regard, the observation in the case of Rasumalla Yellaiah andothers vs. Chief Commissioner, Land and Administration, Hyderabad and others may be noted: "Question of limitation is not always a pure question of law but a mixed question of fact and law. When several factual details have to be gone into to decide said question of law, rejection of plaint at threshold itself, not proper."

However, it is no inflexible rule that rejection cannot be granted on the ground of limitation. Where the bar of limitation is clearly and indisputably ascertainable from the averments of plaint, the plaint can be rejected. Infact, in the much celebrated recent case of Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali, court did reject the plaint on that ground as the bar of limitation was clearly made out from the averments in the plaint.

In a recent case, a 2-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on facts as to whether the plaint in the partciular case had to be rejected as time-barred. While Justice Sanjiv Khanna held that the plaint itself showed that the suit was time barred, Justice Bela Trivedi held that the limitation was a mixed question of facts and law and required trial (Saranpal Kaur Anand versus Praduman Singh Chandhok and others ).

• Rejection of Plaint as deemed decree:

The rejection of plaint brings an end to the suit. It is pertinent to note that the rejection of plaint is a deemed decree under Section 2(2) of the Code . The effect, therefore, is that the same can be appealed under Section 96, CPC . Moreover, OVII R13 provides that rejection of the plaint on any of the grounds mentioned in rule 11 shall not of its own force preclude the plaintiff from presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the same cause of action. In other words, rejection of plaint doesn't bar a fresh suit on the same ground.

• OVII R11 are not exhaustive

In the decision of K Akabar Ali v. Umar Khan , it was observed by the Supreme Court that the provisions of Order VII Rue 11 are not exhaustive and the Court has the inherent power to see that frivolous or vexatious litigations are not allowed to consume the time of the Court

• Alternative Orders to rejection of plaint
• Order of extension of Time

In two cases as provided under Rule 11, court may grant extra time to the plaintiff to correct the default of his plaint, i.e in the case where:

• where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so;
• where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to supply the requisite stamp paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so;

In both these cases, the proviso provides that the court has the power to extend time to make the required corrections [as an alternative to rejecting the plaint] if not doing the same would lead to injustice.

• Order to Amend the Plaint: Can this be granted?

The question of whether court can allow a party to amend the plaint under Order VI Rule 17, so that the plaintiff can escape rejection has been an important judicial question, that has also led to conflicting judgments from High Courts. For a detailed discussion on the earlier position, readers may refer this. However, last year, by the judgment of Sayyed Ayaz v. Prakash G Goyal, Supreme Court has observed that no order to amendment of plaint can be made when the plaint is otherwise liable to be rejected under Rule 11(d). It observed that court under Rule 11 cannot grant the liberty to amend the plaint while rejecting it. Court based its conclusion on the fact that the mandate of Rule 11 is "compulsory" in nature, it is not in the nature of a choice that is available to the court. In such a case, court doesn't have the option to not reject the plaint. The only option with the court is to reject it, in case the same is barred by law, or doesn't disclose a cause of action.

• No piece-meal rejection of plaint

A plaint can either be rejected, in whole, or not at all. The observation of the Supreme Court in Madhav Prasad Aggarwal & Anr. v. Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr may be noted in this regard:

"it is not permissible to reject plaint qua any particular portion of a plaint including against some of the defendant(s) and continue the same against the others. In no uncertain terms the Court has held that if the plaint survives against certain defendant(s) and/or properties, Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC will have no application at all, and the suit as a whole must then proceed to trial. 12. In view of this settled legal position we may now turn to the nature of relief." Relying upon the same, the Delhi High court observed in

In the recent case of Kavita Tushir v. Pushpraj Dalal, the Delhi High court had the rejected the application of rejection of plaint stating that there cannot be any piecemeal rejection of plaint

. Conclusion:

Rejection of plaint is an effective remedy which saves innocent defendants from prolonged legal struggle; while also saving the precious judicial time. Its status as a deemed decree, and the clear legislative statement as to "no bar on fresh plaint" to be filed, on the ground that earlier plaint was rejected, also ensures enough cushions for this provision to not work prejudicially against the innocent plaintiffs.

Plaint in CPC

• Civil Procedure Code Subject-wise Law Notes
• Aishwarya Agrawal
• October 14, 2023

In plaint in CPC is a formal written document submitted by a plaintiff to initiate a civil lawsuit in a court of law. It serves as the initial step in commencing a legal action. The plaint contains essential details, including the parties involved, facts giving rise to the cause of action, the relief sought and jurisdictional information.

It helps define the scope and purpose of the lawsuit and provides the court with the necessary information to proceed with the case. The contents of the plaint in CPC are governed by specific rules and guidelines outlined in the CPC to ensure legal clarity and fairness in civil litigation.

What is Plaint in CPC?

A plaint is a legal document that contains the claims made by the plaintiff when they bring a case to a civil court. It’s the first step in starting a lawsuit.

So, what does a plaint in CPC include?

Well, it has all the important details and things needed for the case, like what the plaintiff is complaining about and why. Even though it’s not defined in the CPC (Civil Procedure Code), you can find the rules for it in Order VII of the CPC.

When we talk about the cause of action in a plaint, it has two parts.

First, there’s the legal theory, which is like the facts that show why the plaintiff thinks they’ve been harmed. Second, there’s the legal remedy, which is what the plaintiff wants the court to do about it.

A plaint is a big deal because it’s the very first step in starting a lawsuit and it helps figure out which civil court should hear the case.

Provisions of Plaint in CPC

Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure is all about the “plaint.” In this order, you’ll find different rules that cover various aspects of what should be in a plaint. Here’s a breakdown:

• Rules 1 to 8: These rules explain what specific details should be included in the plaint.
• Rule 9: This rule tells us how the court should admit the plaint.
• Rules 10 to 10-B: These rules discuss what happens if the plaint in CPC needs to be returned and how parties should appear.
• Main Rules 11 to 13: These rules lay out the situations in which the court can reject the plaint.

Section 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure is important because it says that every lawsuit has to start with the presentation of a plaint in CPC or in a way that the law says. So, it’s clear that a plaint is essential when you want to begin a case in a civil or commercial court.

Contents of A Plaint

A plaint in CPC is a crucial legal document that must contain specific information; otherwise, it won’t be considered valid. These necessary details are outlined in Rules 1 to 8 of Order VII of the CPC. Here’s a breakdown of what should be the content of a plaint in CPC:

• The name of the civil or commercial court where the lawsuit will be filed.
• Information about the plaintiff, including their name, address and description.
• Details about the defendant, including their name, residence and description.
• If the plaintiff has any health issues or disabilities, these should be mentioned.
• The facts that give rise to the cause of action and where this cause of action occurred.
• Facts that help determine the court’s jurisdiction.
• Information about the relief or remedy the plaintiff is seeking from the court.
• If the plaintiff wants to set off a portion of their claim, the amount allowed should be stated.
• The value of the subject matter of the suit, not just for jurisdiction but also for court fees.
• Verification by the plaintiff under oath.

These details make a plaint in CPC essential for starting a lawsuit in civil or commercial courts and it remains significant throughout the legal process. Additionally, Rule 2 of Order VII specifies that the plaintiff must state the exact amount of money they seek from the defendant and Rule 3 requires a proper description of immovable property when it’s involved in the case.

Return of Plaint in CPC

Section 19A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) deals with the “Return of Plaint.”

“19A. Return of plaint.— Whenever the Court finds that for want of jurisdiction it cannot finally determine the question at issue in the suit, it may at any stage of the proceedings return the plaint to be presented to a Court having jurisdiction to determine the question. When the Court so returns a plaint, it shall comply with the provisions of the second paragraph of section 57 of the Code of Civil Procedure (14 of 1882) and make such order with respect to costs as it may think just and the Court shall for the purposes of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877 (15 of 1877) be deemed to have been unable to entertain the suit by reason of defect of jurisdiction. When a plaint so returned is afterwards presented to a High Court, credit shall be given to the plaintiff for the amount of the court-fee paid in the Small Cause Court in respect of the plaint in the levy of any fees which according to the practice of the High Court are credited to the Government.”

According to this section:

• If a court determines that it lacks jurisdiction to finally decide the matter in a lawsuit at any stage of the proceedings, it has the authority to return the plaint to be presented before a court that has the jurisdiction to address the issue.
• When a court returns a plaint in such a situation, it must follow the provisions of the second paragraph of Section 57 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1882. This may include making orders related to costs , as deemed just.
• For the purposes of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877, the court returning the plaint is considered to have been unable to entertain the suit due to a jurisdictional defect.
• If a returned plaint is later presented to a High Court, the plaintiff is credited for the amount of court fees paid in the Small Cause Court concerning the plaint, as is the practice of the High Court, in the levy of any fees, which are typically credited to the government.

Rejection of Plaint

A plaint in CPC can be rejected in certain situations when specific requirements are not met. Here are some instances in which a plaint may be rejected:

• Non-Disclosure of Cause of Action : If the cause of action is not clearly mentioned in the plaint, making it impossible to prove the harm suffered by the plaintiff, the court may reject the plaint. It’s essential to present the facts clearly to seek relief. For example, in the case of SNP Shipping Service Pvt. Ltd. v. World Tanker Carrier Corporation, the plaint in CPC was rejected and the suit dismissed under Order 7, Rule 1(a) of the CPC, 1908.
• Undervaluation of Relief: If the relief sought by the plaintiff is undervalued and the court asks the plaintiff to correct the valuation within a given time frame, but the plaintiff fails to do so, the plaint in CPC may be rejected.
• Improperly Stamped Documents: When all the documents are not properly stamped and the court requires the plaintiff to provide the required stamp paper within a specified time, failure to do so may lead to the rejection of the plaint.
• Lack of Legal Basis: If the plaint is based on a statement or claim secured by a law or statute that does not grant the plaintiff the right to file the suit, the court may reject it.
• Failure to Submit Duplicate Copy: If the rules stipulate the submission of a duplicate copy of the plaint and the plaintiff fails to do so, the court may dismiss the plaint.
• Non-Compliance with Rule 9 of Order VII: If the plaintiff does not comply with the provisions of Rule 9 of Order VII of the CPC, the court may reject the plaint.

From of the Plaint in CPC

A plaint in CPC should follow a specific format, consisting of three essential parts: the heading and title, the body of the plaint and the relief claimed. Let’s explore these parts in more detail:

Heading and Title

Name of the Court: The plaint in CPC should begin with the name of the court where the case is being filed. It is not necessary to mention the name of the presiding officer; specifying the court’s name is sufficient. For example, “In the Court of the District Judge, Sirsa.”

Parties to the Suit: In every lawsuit, there are typically two parties: the plaintiff and the defendant. However, there can be more than one plaintiff or defendant. The plaint in CPC must provide all the necessary particulars about these parties, including their names, residences, father’s names, ages and any other details required for identification.

If there are multiple parties, their names should be mentioned according to their respective roles in the case. If one of the parties is a minor or of unsound mind, this information should also be included in the cause title.

Title of the Suit: The title of the suit should explain the reasons for bringing the matter to court and indicate the court’s jurisdiction.

Body of the Plaint

The body of the plaint in CPC is where the plaintiff elaborates on their concerns. It should be organised into short paragraphs, each presenting a single fact or point. The body of the plaint can be further divided into two main parts:

1. Formal Part:

• Date of Cause of Action: The plaint in CPC must include the date when the cause of action occurred. This date is crucial because it helps determine whether the lawsuit is filed within the legally specified time limits, known as the period of limitation.
• Jurisdiction of the Court: The plaint should clearly state the facts that establish the court’s pecuniary (financial) and territorial (geographical) jurisdiction over the subject matter of the lawsuit.
• Value of the Subject Matter: The value of the subject matter of the lawsuit should be properly stated. This is essential both for determining the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction and for calculating court fees.
• Statement Regarding Minority: If any party involved in the case is a minor, this should be mentioned in the plaint.
• Representative Character of the Plaintiff: If the plaintiff is representing others, such as in a class-action lawsuit or as a legal representative, this should be indicated in the plaint.
• Reasons for Claiming Exemptions: If the plaintiff is initiating the suit after the period of limitation has expired and is seeking an exemption under the law, the reasons for this should be explained in the plaint.

2. Substantial Portion:

• In this section, the plaint in CPC must include all the essential facts that form the basis of the lawsuit. This means detailing the grounds on which the plaintiff is pursuing the cause of action, including any additional legal grounds.
• It should be demonstrated in the plaint that the defendant has a clear interest in the subject matter of the case, justifying their involvement and the court’s jurisdiction.
• If there are multiple defendants and their liability is not joint, the individual liability of each defendant should be separately specified in the plaint.
• Similarly, if there are multiple plaintiffs and their causes of action are not joint, this should also be clearly indicated in the plaint.

The relief claimed is a crucial part of the plaint. It is where the plaintiff specifies precisely what they are seeking from the court. This can be a request for compensation (damages), a demand for specific performance of a contract, an injunction to prevent certain actions, or any other form of relief. It’s vital to state the relief clearly and accurately in the plaint because the claims made in the plaint in CPC cannot be supplemented or altered through oral pleadings later on.

Signature and Verification

At the end of the plaint, the plaintiff’s signature should be placed. If the plaintiff cannot be present due to a legitimate reason, an authorised representative’s signature can suffice.

The plaint in CPC must also be duly verified by the plaintiff. If the plaintiff is unable to do so personally, their representative may verify it on their behalf, after informing the court.

The verification process involves specifying which paragraphs in the pleadings the plaintiff has personally verified based on their knowledge of the facts and which paragraphs have been verified based on information received and subsequently believed to be true.

The plaintiff or verifier’s signature, along with the date and place, at the end of the plaint, is essential.

It’s worth noting that the verification process must take place before a competent court or in front of an Oath Commissioner to ensure the authenticity of the statements made in the plaint in CPC. This adds credibility to the claims presented in the legal document.

In conclusion, a plaint in CPC is a formal and crucial legal document that initiates a civil lawsuit. It provides a clear and structured account of the case, including the parties involved, the facts leading to the cause of action, the relief sought and jurisdictional details.

The plaint plays a fundamental role in defining the scope and purpose of the lawsuit and it ensures that the court has the necessary information to proceed with the case. Adherence to the specific rules and guidelines outlined in the CPC is essential when drafting a plaint to maintain legal clarity and fairness in civil litigation.

You might like

Types of Asylum in International Law

Cyber Crime in the Banking Sector

Full Bench Formula in Labour Law

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name  *

Email  *

Add Comment  *

Post Comment

Return of Plaint by the Court (Order VII Rules 10, 10A and 10B)

• Post author By Hemant More
• Post date June 30, 2022
• 1 Comment on Return of Plaint by the Court (Order VII Rules 10, 10A and 10B)

Indian Legal System > Civil Laws > The Code of Civil Procedure > Return of Plaint by the Court (Order VII Rules 10, 10A and 10B)

The term Plaint has not been defined in the Code. However, it can be defined as a statement of claim by presentation of which the suit is instituted. It is pleading of the plaintiff. Thus, it is a legal document which contains the written statement of the plaintiff’s claim. It is the first step towards the initiation of a suit. Through the help of plaint, the plaintiff narrates or describes the cause of action and related information which is considered as essential from the viewpoint of the suit.  Order VII Rules 10, 10A, and 10B of the Civil Procedure Code, deals with the return of plaint. The CPC empowers the civil courts to return the plaint to the plaintiff if the court believes that the plaint is not properly filed or any suit presented before it has no jurisdiction to try it.

CPC provides that the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted. Once the Court has held that it has no pecuniary jurisdiction, it should not have dismissed the suit but is bound to return it for presentation to proper Court. The returned plaint will start afresh when it is presented to the proper court. The freshly filed plaint in the proper court is not the continuation of the plaint presented in the improper court. The order of the court relating to return of the plaint is appealable.

Return is different from rejection and it needs to be noted. Return of plaint does not connote that the plaint had mistaken or that the rules for drafting the plaint were not conformed to. It simply means that the court is not empowered to try the suit for which the plaint is filed. On the contrary, the plaint is rejected if the essential requirements of a plaint are not provided in the plaint or if the certain elements are vague and ambiguous.

Grounds for Return of Plaint:

The court shall return a plaint on the following grounds:

• Court has no jurisdiction, or
• There is a valid objection to jurisdiction

According to Order VII Rule 10 (1), subject to the provisions of Rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted. Thus, according to Order VII Rule 10(1) of CPC, a plaint is returned on the sole ground of lack of jurisdiction with the concerned court.

The court can lack jurisdiction on three occasions mentioned below;

• Territorial Jurisdiction
• Pecuniary Jurisdiction
• Subject matter Jurisdiction

For example, a plaint is filed in the city civil court by A against his employer for unlawful retrenchment from a job. Since there are specific labour courts to deal with these cases, the city civil court does not have the jurisdiction to adjudge and hence, plaint can be returned by the court. Under this rule, the court can return the plaint for lack of jurisdiction but the plaintiff has every right to file the plaint again in the appropriate forum.

In Kallu v. Phudan, AIR 1946 All 488 case, the Court held that where a suit filed in a revenue court is not triable by that court, the court should not dismiss the suit, but return the plaint to be presented to, the proper court.

In Hanamanthappa v. Chandrashekhrappa, (1997) 9 SCC 688 case, the Court held that on the return of plaint, the suit should be instituted when plaint is presented in the proper court. It will not be regarded as a continuation of the old suit. It will be treated as a fresh plaint subject to limitation, pecuniary jurisdiction and payment of court-fees.

In Gopi Krishna v. Avil Bose, AIR 1965 Cal 59 case, the Calcutta High Court said that “at any stage of suit” must mean at any stage of the suit before judgment therein is delivered.

In Visweswara v. Nair, (1912) 35 Mad 567 case, If court has no jurisdiction, it should return the plaint even though the claim is undervalued; and when presented to the proper court, the later court is bound to give credit for the fee levied by the former court.

Explanation attached to the rule states that “For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a Court of appeal or revision may direct, after setting aside the decree passed in a suit, the return of the plaint under this sub-Rule.”

If the Court has jurisdiction over some of the causes of action and thus has jurisdiction over a portion of the plaint there should be no reason why it cannot allow the plaintiff to amend the plaint to lop off those portions beyond its grip and proceed with the portions within its grasp. Where the Court finds that the plaint comprises causes of action within its jurisdiction as well as causes of action outside its jurisdiction, neither the suit can be dismissed as a whole nor the plaint can be returned as a whole.

In Smt. Sheela Adhikari v. Rabindra Nath Adhikari, AIR 1988 Cal. 273 case, the court held that the plaint, if it is to be returned, must be returned either as a whole or not at all and it is not for the Court to make a dissection of the plaint and then to retain a part and to return a part.

In Secretary of State v. Natabar, AIR 1927 Pat 254 case, a suit against two defendants, cognizable by a civil court as against the first and by the revenue court as against the second was filed in a civil court. The Patna High Court, directed that the plaint be returned for presentation to the revenue court, and that a copy of it should be  retained on the record for trial of the suit against the first defendant.

In Latu v. Rani Mahalaxmi Bai, AIR 1942 All 130 case, the Allahabad High Court indicated two alternatives: either to keep original plaint on the record and give a certified copy for presentation to the revenue court, or other proper court or dismiss that part of the suit which is beyond its jurisdiction and proceed to try the rest or strike out the bad part under Order VI Rule 16.

Procedure for Returning the Plaint:

The procedure for returning the plaint depends upon two circumstances. First, where the court in the initial hearings identify that it does not have the jurisdiction to try the case and it feels that the plaint needs to be returned and second, where the defendant has appeared and after which the court believes that plaint needs to be returned for lack of jurisdiction.

Case 1: Where the court in the initial hearings identify that it does not have the jurisdiction to try the case and it feels that the plaint needs to be returned

In this case, the Order VII Rule 10(2) mandates the court to endorse the following particulars on the plaint:

• Date on which the plaint was initially presented by the plaintiff.
• Date on which the plaint is being returned by the court. The returning date is not the one where the court formed the opinion but when the court actually returned the plaint.
• Cause title, i.e., the details of the party which presented the plaint.
• Reasons that compelled the court to return the plaint

In Moneys Transports v. Tanjore, AIR 1979 Mad 196 case, the Court held that the requirement of sub-rule 2 are mandatory and without the endorsement required by the sub-rule, the plaint cannot be returned and cannot be presented to the proper court. This means that the proceedings for the return of the plaint came to an end only when an endorsement was actually made on the plaint. Then only can the plaint be said to be ready for being returned for presentation to the proper Court.

Case2: where the defendant has appeared and after which the court believes that plaint needs to be returned for lack of jurisdiction.

Order VII Rule 10A applies to the situation where the plaint is returned after the defendant(s) has/have appeared before the court. The following list summarises the procedure that needs to be followed while returning the plaint:

• The court must intimate the plaintiff through registered post or any authorized manner that the plaint is to be returned for lack of jurisdiction.
• The plaintiff needs to appear before the court either personally or through his counsel
• The plaintiff is required to inform the court as to where the plaintiff proposes to file the new plaint after it is returned by this court.
• The court may fix the date of appearance of plaintiff and defendant before the competent court where the new plaint is to be filed.
• The court may, at the request of the plaintiff, serve notices to the plaintiff and defendant requiring them to appear before the competent Court and intimating them of the return of plaint.
• This notice shall serve as summon and no new summon will be required to be issued by the court where the returned plaint is filed

In Vicco Laboratories Bombay v. Hindustan Rimmer, AIR 1979 Del 114 case, the Court held that if after the defendant has appeared, the court is of the view that it has no jurisdiction and should, therefore, return the plaint, it must give intimation of such decision to the plaintiff. The plaintiff, thereupon, may make an application described in sub-rule 2. The ‘may’ in sub-rule 2 shows that it is his discretion to make or not make an application. It is not incumbent on him to do so. But if he does make the application and follows the procedure there laid down, the court shall fix the date of appearance by the parties in the court in which the plaint is to be presented and give notice of such date to the parties. Since the defendant by such notice is made awre of the suit against him and the date when he has to appear, the notice is treated as summons. As plaintiff choose the procedure laid down in sub-rule 2 and obtain an orderm, he naturally can have no right to appeal against the order returning the plaint. Application by him under sub-rule 2 is treayed as acceptance of the order of return.

In George Shipping Co. Ltd. v. MV Irene Pa Foreign Flagged Vessel, AIR 1997 Bom 280 case, the Court held that on return of plaint, the procedure laid down in rules 10 and 10A are to be followed. Fresh suit for the same cause of action is not maintainable.

Appeal Against Return of Plaint:

A Plaintiff can file an appeal from the order under Rule 10 of Order 7. Such appeal is maintainable under Order 43 Rule 1 (a). But where the plaint was returned on an application made by the plaintiff under Order 7 Rule10A (2) such appeal is not maintainable.

In Straw Products Ltd. v. Municipal Board Bhopal, AIR 1959 MP 253 case, the Court held that an appeal lies from an order returning a plaint to be presented to the proper court, whether the order is made by the court of first instance (Order 43 Rule 1(a)) or by the court of first appeal in the exercise of powers conferred upon it by Section 107 of CPC. But no second appeal lies from the order of the first Appellant Court (Nilkanth v. Balwant, AIR 1925 Bom 431)

Power of Appellant Court to Transfer Suit to the Proper Court:

According to Order VII Rule 10 B(1), where, on an appeal against an order for the return of plaint, the Court hearing the appeal confirms such order, the Court of appeal may, if the plaintiff by an application so desires, while returning the plaint, direct plaintiff to file the plaint, subject to the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), in the Court in which the suit should have been instituted, (whether such Court is within or without the State in which the Court hearing the appeal is situated), and fit a date for the appearance of the parties in the Court in which the plaint is directed to be filed and when the date is so fixed it shall not be necessary for the Court in which the plaint is filed to serve the defendant with the summons for appearance in the suit, unless that Court in which the plaint is filed, for reasons to be recorded, otherwise directs. According to clause 2, the direction made by the Court under sub-rule (1), shall be without any prejudice to the rights of the parties to question the jurisdiction of the Court, in which the plaint is filed, to try the suit.

This rule has been added to Order VII with a view to empowering the court hearing an appeal against an order of return of plaint to direct that, instead of the plaint being returned, the suit may be transferred to the court in which it should have been instituted. Further, the provisions for abolish the necessary for serving the summons on the defendants, where the order of return of plaint was made after the appearance of the defendants in the suit.

In Latadevi v. Ramnath, AIR 1987 Bom 364 case, the Court held that the provision contained in R. 10B specify a detailed procedure and that too of a mandatory nature.

Conclusion:

As per the above-stated matter, it can be said, that jurisdiction of the court is necessary, to obtain adjudication and the decision of court without jurisdiction is a nullity in the eyes of the law, and not binding of anyone, though this is subject to the exceptions of section 21 of CPC. Return is different from rejection and it needs to be noted. Return of plaint does not connote that the plaint had mistaken or that the rules for drafting the plaint were not conformed to. It simply means that the court is not empowered to try the suit for which the plaint is filed. On the contrary, the plaint is rejected if the essential requirements of a plaint are not provided in the plaint or if the certain elements are vague and ambiguous. on the return of plaint, the suit should be instituted when plaint is presented in the proper court. It will not be regarded as a continuation of the old suit. It will be treated as a fresh plaint subject to limitation, pecuniary jurisdiction and payment of court-fees.

• Tags (1912) 35 Mad 567 , (1997) 9 SCC 688 , Admission of plaint , AIR 1927 Pat 254 , AIR 1942 All 130 , AIR 1946 All 488 , AIR 1965 Cal 59 , AIR 1979 Del 114 , AIR 1979 Mad 196 , AIR 1987 Bom 364 , AIR 1988 Cal. 273 , AIR 1997 Bom 280 , Civil Procedure Code , CPC , George Shipping Co. Ltd. v. MV Irene Pa Foreign Flagged Vessel , Gopi Krishna v. Avil Bose , Hanamanthappa v. Chandrashekhrappa , Institution of Suit , Jurisdiction , Kallu v. Phudan , Latadevi v. Ramnath , Latu v. Rani Mahalaxmi Bai , Moneys Transports v. Tanjore , Pecuniary jurisdiction , Plaint , Rejection of plaint , Return of plaint , Secretary of State v. Natabar , Smt. Sheela Adhikari v. Rabindra Nath Adhikari , Subject matter jurisdiction , Suit , Territorial jurisdiction , Vicco Laboratories Bombay v. Hindustan Rimmer , Visweswara v. Nair

One reply on “Return of Plaint by the Court (Order VII Rules 10, 10A and 10B)”

It is very much useful as well as helpful. I am truly impressed. In a single word, it is ABSOLUTELY HELPFUL FOR ALL.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Paraphrasing Laws: Tips to Effectively Paraphrase Text in Academic Writing
• What Does It Mean to Be a Defensive Driver?
• Top 10 Skills to be a Successful Lawyer.
• How to prepare for UGC NET LAW JUNE 2024? || UGC NET LAW Paper 2 ||
• Fashion Laws in India

Stages of Civil Suit under CPC || Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ||

Table of Contents

Stages of the Civil Suit as per the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News

• Case Briefs

De Novo trial to be conducted of a plaint returned under Order VII Rule 10 and 10A of CPC

Supreme Court: Answering a reference the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ has held that if a

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)

Supreme Court : Answering a reference the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ has held that if a plaint is returned under Order VII Rule 10 and 10A of CPC, for presentation in the court in which it should have been instituted, the plaint is to be considered as a fresh plaint and the trial is to be conducted de novo.

The Court was hearing the reference by a two Judge Bench opining a perceived conflict between two Division Bench decisions in Joginder Tuli v. S.L. Bhatia, (1997) 1 SCC 502 and Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Modern Construction & Co., (2014) 1 SCC 648 .

Joginder Tuli verdict

“Normally, when the plaint is directed to be returned for presentation to the proper court perhaps it has to   start   from   the beginning but in this case, since the evidence was already adduced by the parties, the matter was tried accordingly. The High Court had directed to proceed from that stage at which the suit stood transferred. We find no illegality in the order passed by the High Court warranting interference.”

Modern Constructions verdict

“If the court where the suit is instituted, is of the view that it has no jurisdiction, the plaint is to be returned in view of the provisions of Order 7 Rule 10 CPC and the plaintiff can present it before the court having competent jurisdiction. In such a factual matrix, the plaintiff is entitled to exclude the period during which he prosecuted the case before the court having no jurisdiction in view of the provisions of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, and may also seek adjustment of court fee paid in that court. However, after presentation before the court of competent jurisdiction, the plaint is to be considered as a fresh plaint and the trial is to be conducted de novo even if it stood concluded before the court having no competence to try the same.”

Issue referred

If a plaint is returned under Order VII Rule 10 and 10A of CPC, for presentation in the court in which it should have been instituted, whether the suit shall proceed de novo or will it continue from the stage where it was pending before the court at the time of returning of the plaint?

Larger Bench’s answer to reference

The Court noticed that the observations in Joginder Tuli verdict are very clear that the suit has to proceed afresh before the proper court and that the directions came to be made more in the peculiar facts of the case in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. Further, it does not take into consideration any earlier judgments and there is no discussion of the law either. Hence, it has no precedential value as laying down any law.

The Modern Construction verdict , on the hand, was pronounced after consideration of the law and precedents requiring reconsideration in view of any conflict with Joginder Tuli Verdict and hence, lays down the correct law.

The Court also overruled the ruling in Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Tejparas Associates and Exports Pvt. Ltd., (2019) 9 SCC 435 , wherein it was held that in pursuance of the amendment dated 01­02­1977 by reason of insertion of Rule 10A to Order VII, it cannot be said that under all circumstances the return of a plaint for presentation before the appropriate court shall be considered as a fresh filing.

Explaining the statutory scheme, the Court noticed that the language of Order VII Rule 10-A is in marked contrast to the language of Section 24(2) and Section 25(3) of CPC. In cases dealing with transfer of proceedings from a Court having jurisdiction to another Court, the discretion vested in the Court by Sections 24(2) and 25(3) either to retry the proceedings or proceed from the point at which such proceeding was transferred or withdrawn, is in marked contrast to the scheme under Order VII Rule 10 read with Rule 10-A where no such discretion is given and the proceeding has to commence de novo.

The Court, hence, held that  Oriental Insurance Co . does not lay down the correct law.

[EXL Careers v. Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd.,  2020 SCC OnLine SC 621 , decided on 05.08.2020]

Section 125 CrPC: Can the second wife be entitled to maintenance from her husband?

Delhi HC granted bail to a man accused of raping woman he met on dating app on pretext of marriage

Do convicts have a fundamental right to procreate? Watch to know what Delhi High Court recently held

Book release of 8th edition of “Criminology, Penology and Victimology” revised by Sanjay Vashishtha

Join the discussion, leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Rule of Plaint in Civil Procedure Code

Order vii of cpc.

• Identification of the court with jurisdiction to hear the cause of action.
• Comprehensive particulars, including the plaintiff's name, description, and residential address for correspondence.
• Thorough particulars, encompassing the defendant's name, description, and residential address for correspondence.
• Disclosure of the age and mental soundness of the plaintiff and defendant.
• A presentation of the facts underlying the case, giving rise to the cause of action.
• A declaration of the plaintiff's claim.
• An exposition of the case's background that prompted the plaintiff to approach the court.
• A statement establishing the court's jurisdiction that has been invoked.
• An indication of the value of the subject matter of the suit and any applicable set-offs.
• A declaration of the relief sought from the court.
• An indication of any interim relief sought, to be articulated before the final request.
• The signature of the plaintiff or, in their absence, an authorized representative.
• The verification of the plaint by the plaintiff or, in their absence, an authorized representative.
• The verification should be followed by the signature of the person performing the verification, along with the date and location at which the verification is conducted. This verification is undertaken before the court or an oath commissioner.
• A list of documents referred to in the plaint when not in the possession of the plaintiff.
• A list of references made in the plaint when not in possession of the plaintiff.
• A prescribed form of address.
• The appropriate form of process fee.
• A power of attorney, if applicable.
• Insufficient Court Fees: If the plaintiff fails to pay the requisite court fees or underpays them, the court has the authority to reject the plaint.
• Inadequate Relief: If the relief sought in the plaint is inadequate, the plain may be dismissed.
• Lack of Jurisdiction: If the court where the plaint is filed does not have the appropriate jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter, the court can dismiss the plaint. In such cases, the plaintiff should file the suit in a court with the correct jurisdiction.
• Non-Compliance with Legal Requirements: If the plaint does not adhere to the formal and substantive legal prerequisites, such as failing to articulate a clear cause of action or omitting essential particulars, it may be subject to rejection.
• Unauthorized Presentation: If someone not authorized by law presents the plaint, it may be dismissed by the court.
• Res Judicata: If the subject matter of the plaint has already been settled by a competent court and is thus barred by the principle of res judicata, the court may reject it.
• Suit Barred by Law: If the lawsuit is prohibited by any legal provision or is time-barred (i.e., not filed within the prescribed limitation period), the court may choose to reject the plaint.
• Inadequate Stamps: If the plaint lacks the necessary stamps or has insufficient stamping, it may be dismissed by the court.
• Duplicate not submitted: If the plaint is not submitted in duplicate, it may be dismissed.
• Violation of Rule 9: Violating Rule (9) of Order VII, CPC, if the processing fee and copies of the plaint are not filed within seven days of the day the summons were issued to the defendant, [Rule 11 (f)].
• The Supreme Court observed that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC merely on the ground that 'the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief in the suit.
• The Supreme Court observed that a plaint should be rejected under Order VII Rule XI(a) and (d) of CPC if it is vexatious, illusory cause of action and barred by limitation.
• The Kerala High Court recently held that a trial judge cannot wait until conclusion of trial to decide if the plaint has to be rejected, and added that such decision should be made solely on an assessment of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
• The Supreme Court has recently reiterated that the principle of res judicata cannot be invoked as a ground for the rejection of a plaint under Order V Rule 11 (d) of CPC.
• The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reiterated that the entire plaint has to be considered to find out if it discloses a cause of action that requires determination of court and if it does, then the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.
• The Supreme Court observed that appropriateness of prayer sought is not an issue that should be considered while deciding an application seeking rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC.
• The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Monday ruled that the provision of Revision under Section 115 CPC cannot be used to challenge an order of rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC.
• The Supreme Court observed that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC merely because there are some inconsistent averments in the plaint.
• For dealing with an application under Rule 11 of Order VII of CPC, only the averments made in the plaint and the documents produced along with the plaint are required to be seen.
• https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-rejection-of-plaint-order-vii-rule-11-cpc-214207
• https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/rejection-of-plaint-order-vii-rule-11-cpc-cause-of-action-limitation-ramisetty-venkatanna-vs-nasyam-jamal-saheb-2023-livelaw-sc-372-227635
• https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/kerala-high-court/kerala-high-court-rejection-of-plaint-completion-trial-against-law-scheme-239048
• https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-ruling-res-judicata-plaint-rejection-application-order-7-rule-11-cpc-238024
• https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/andhra-pradesh-high-court/andhra-pradesh-high-court-ruling-plaint-rejection-order-7-rule-11-cpc-237546
• https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-appropriateness-prayer-rejection-of-plaint-sajjan-singh-vs-jasvir-kaur-2023-livelaw-sc-517-232482
• https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/jammu-kashmir/jammu-kashmir-ladakh-high-court-rejecting-plaint-deemed-decree-civil-procedure-code-229422
• https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/g-nagaraj-vs-bp-mruthunjayanna-2023-livelaw-sc-311-226490
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/sample-plaint-civil-procedure-code/
• https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7119-plaint-written-statement-set-off-and-counter-claim-under-civil-procedure-code-1908.html

Law Article in India

Please drop your comments, you may like.

The Gig Economy: A Transfor...

Impotentia Excusat Legem

The Doctrine of Force Majeu...

Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia

Wagering Contract: How to P...

Void Agreements Under India...

Legal question & answers, lawyers in india - search by city.

Law Articles

How to file for mutual divorce in delhi.

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Increased Age For Girls Marriage

It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...

Facade of Social Media

One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...

The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...

Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly

• Home (current)
• Intellectual Property Law
• Constitutional Developments
• Protests and Riots
• Recent Updates
• Criminal Law
• Finology Legal

Stages of the Civil Suit as per the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Any court case that involves disputes between individuals over money or any other injury to personal rights are known as civil cases. For a Civil Suit, there are two criterions- the cause of action and the claim for damages/compensation. The Civil Suit must also fulfil all the conditions laid down in Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

In India, a civil case in initiated when an individual (also known as the plaintiff) claims to have suffered due to the action of another individual (also known as the defendant) thereafter filing a complaint. Majority of the suits follow the principles laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Presentation of the Plaint (Order 7 of CPC 1908)

Presentation of the plaint in a court is the initial step of the pleadings in a case. Every suit commences when the plaintiff files a plaint to the court. The entire judicial system under the civil law is set in motion by filing the plaint. The Plaint should consist of the following contents:

Name of the court where the suit is being brought

Name and place of residence of the plaintiff

Name and place of residence of the defendant

Whether the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or of unsound mind

Facts constituting the cause of action and the time it arose

Facts showing the court has jurisdiction

Plaintiff’s claims

The damages in case of money suits

Proof of the defendant’s liability

List of the documents submitted with the plaint

Issue and Service of Summons on defendant (Order 5)

The second stage is the issue and service of summons on the defendant. Once the suit is registered, summons is sent by the court to call the person on a specific date whose name is written in the plaint. Through this, the defendant is notified that a civil proceeding has commenced against him and he is required to present his defence in the court. The summons is signed by the judge and sealed with the seal of court. The court may also require the plaintiff to be present during the appearance of the defendant as well. The court might require the party to appear in person if:

The party resides within the court’s jurisdiction

They reside at a place that is less than fifty or if there is railway communication then less than two hundred miles distance from the Court.

Appearance of the parties

After the summons is served to the defendant, the next stage is commenced with the appearance of the parties before the court on a specific date mentioned. The defendant is required to appear in front of the court, either personally or by a representative. If the defendant fails to appear on the specified date, the court may proceed ex parte. If the plaintiff is absent on the date, then the court may dismiss the suit. Where both the parties are not present, the court dismisses the suit. If the summons was for the final disposition, then the defendant is required to present evidences or documents in order to support his case.

Ex-party Decree (Order 9)

Whenever a defendant fails to appear in front of the court on the specified date, the court may proceed ex-parte. A decree against the defendant in his absence can be passed under the following circumstances:

Where any party from whom a written statement is required fails to present it within the mentioned time by the court.

Where the defendant has not filed a pleading, the court delivers the judgement based on the facts that are mentioned in the plaint. (Exception: person with any disability)

Where the plaintiff is present and the defendant is not. The court might pass an order that the suit will be heard ex-parte.

Filing of the written statement by the defendant

The defendant is required to file a written statement of his defence within thirty to ninety days, as allowed by the court. A written statement is a reply statement of the defendant denying all the allegations that are made against him by the plaintiff in the plaint. The defendant can also make counter claims in the written statement. In case the defendant fails to file a written statement, the court may take decisions according to the plaint. The provision of written statement is mentioned in Order 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure ,1908. The following should be the contents of the Written Statement:

In the case where the defendant is relying on any document as his defence or counter-claims, then the same documents should be mentioned in the list which is attached along with the written statement.

The written statement should point out all the allegations that the defendant is denying.

It is important to note that if any document, that the defendant is relying upon, is not mentioned in the written statement, the same will not be accepted as an evidence.

Production of documents by the parties

After the written statement is filed by the defendant, the next stage of the suit is the production of documents. Both the plaintiff and defendant are required to file the documents that are in their possession. However, if the document that the party is relying upon, is not in their possession then they can apply to the court for the issue of summons to the person in whose possession the document is.

Examination of parties

This is an important stage after appearance. During the first hearing of the suit the court will ask each party whether they agree to or denies the allegations that are made in the plaint and the written statement. The questions can be asked orally by the judge. Such agreements or denials are recorded by the judge in writing. The provisions of this stage are mentioned in Order 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Framing of issues by the court

The stage following the examination of parties is the framing of issues. This step is exclusively dealt by the judge. Issues arise when a party denies the allegations of the other party. Each allegation becomes an issue and judgment is delivered individually on the issues. If the defendant does not make any defence during the first hearing, then no issues are formed and judgment is delivered. Order 14 of CPC mentions the provisions regarding the framing of issues.

Summoning and Attendance of the witnesses

After the issues are framed, the parties shall present the list of witnesses, to the court, whom they propose to call either to provide evidence or to produce documents. This list should be presented on the date appointed by the court and not later than fifteen days. The provisions of the same is mentioned in Order 16 of the CPC.

Hearing of Suits and Examination of Witnesses

On the date fixed for hearing of the suit, the party having the right to begin should start with stating his case and producing the evidences to support the issue that he is bound to prove. The other party will then continue by stating his cases and produce evidences. The plaintiff is required to submit the evidence that were mentioned earlier. The advocate on the defendant’s side will then cross-examine the plaintiff and any witness that the plaintiff presents. The same will be the process un the case of the defendant I which the advocate on the plaintiff’s side will cross-examine him and any witness presented by him.

After examination of the witness is complete, the suit is kept for argument. In this stage, both the parties present a summary of the case and evidence in support of the issues in front of the judge in the final session.

Judgement is the statement that is passed by the judge on the ground of which a decree is passed. After hearing both sides of the case, the court shall announce the judgement either immediately or within one month of the completion of the arguments.

Preparation of Decree

After the judgement is delivered, the next step is the preparation of the decree by the concerned clerk. The decree shall agree with the judgement and should contain the number of the suit, names and descriptions of the parties, their addresses, the claims and the reliefs that have been granted. Order 20 Rule 6,6A talks about the provisions for the preparation of Decree.

Execution of Decree

Through execution, a decree-holder compels the judgment-debtor to carry out the mandate of the decree or order as the case may be. An execution is considered to be complete when the creditor gets the money or other claims awarded to him by judgement, decree or order.

Unlike the criminal cases which aims at serving punishments, a civil suit pursues compensation. It should also be kept in mind that prior to the final arguments, the parties have a chance to make changes to their pleading. In such cases, prior permission of the court is necessary. However, if the above-mentioned procedure is not followed then the registry has the right to dismiss the suit. 

Antalina Guha, is in the  5th year of B.A. LL.B course in Ajeenkya DY Patil University, with a core interest in Intellectual Property Rights and Criminal law.

Liked What You Just Read? Share this Post:

Wanna share your views on this comment here:.

Related to this

Under legal.

Substantive Law vs. Procedural Law | Types, Case Laws

Top Non-CLAT LLM Programs in India

Should the Caste Census be DONE in India?

How to Prepare for CLAT PG 2025 in 3 Months

Do Doctors need Central Protection Law?

Finology legal on facebook, finology legal on twitter.

Copyright © 2024 Finology Ventures Pvt. Ltd. | All Rights Reserved

Popular Tags

Popular authors.

Popular Posts

Definition: Decree and Order Under CPC

Interpretation Clause: Some of the important words as they have been defined U/s 2 of the Code are as under: Section -2: In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context- Section–2 (1) “Code” includes rules. Section-2(2) “Decree” means the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as regards the court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either Preliminary or final. It shall be deemed to include the rejection of a plaint and the determination of any question within Section-144, but shall not include:-

• any adjudication from which an appeal lies as an appeal from an order, or
• any order for dismissal for default.

Explanation: A decree is preliminary where further proceedings have to be taken before the suit can be completely disposed of. It is final when such adjudication completely disposes of the suit. It may be partly preliminary and partly final.

Decree [Section-2 (2)] and Order [Section-2 (14)] Essential Elements of a decree: The decision of a Court can be termed as a “decree” upon the satisfaction of the following elements:-

• There must be an adjudication .
• Such adjudication must have been given in a suit
• It must have determined the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matter in controversy in the suit.
• Such determination must be of a conclusive nature, and
• There must be formal expression of such adjudication.
• An Adjudication: Adjudication means “the judicial determination of the matter in dispute”. If there is no judicial determination of any matter in dispute or such judicial determination is not by a Court, it is not a decree; e.g., an order of dismissal of a suit in default for non appearance of parties, or of dismissal of an appeal for want of prosecution are not decrees because they do not judicially deal with the matter in dispute.
• In a Suit: Suit means a Civil proceeding instituted by the presentation of a Plaint. Thus, every suit is instituted by the presentation of Plaint. Where there is no Civil suit, there is no decree; e.g., Rejection of an application for leave to sue in forma pauper is is not a decree, because there cannot be a plaint in such case until the application is granted. Exception: But where in an enactment specific provisions have been made to treat the applications as suits, then they are statutory suits and the decision given thereunder are, therefore, decrees; e.g., proceeding under the Indian Succession Act, the Hindu Marriage Act, the Land Acquisition Act, the Arbitration Act, etc.
• Rights of the parties: The adjudication must have determined the rights i.e., the substantive rights and not merely procedural rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matter in controversy in the suit. “Rights of the parties” under section 2(2). The rights of the parties inter se (between the parties) relating to status, limitation, jurisdictions, frame of accounts, etc. “Rights in matters in procedure” are not included in section 2(2); e.g., An order of dismissal for non-prosecution of an application for execution, or refusing leave to sue in forma pauperis, or a mere right to sue, are not decrees as they do not determine the rights of the parties.
• Conclusive Determination: The determination must be final and conclusive as regards the Court, which passes it. An interlocutory order which does not finally decide the rights of the parties is not a decree; e.g., An order refusing an adjournment, or of striking out defence of a tenant under the relevant Rent Act, or an order passed by the appellate Court under Order 41, rule 23 to decide some issues and remitting other issues to the trial Court for determination are not decrees because they do not decide the rights of the parties conclusively. But, An order dismissing an appeal summarily under Order-41, or holding it to be not maintainable, or dismissal of a suit for want of evidence or proof are decrees, because they conclusively decide the rights of the parties to the suit.
• Preliminary Decree Final Decree Partly Preliminary & Partly
• Final Decree

Preliminary Decree: Where an adjudication decides the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit, but does not completely dispose of the suit, it is a Preliminary Decree.

A preliminary decree is only a stage in working out the rights of the parties, which are to be finally adjudicated by a final decree.

Provisions in the Code for passing of the Preliminary Decrees:

• a. Suits for possession and mesne profit; Order 20 Rule 12
• Administrative Suits; Order 20 Rule 13
• Suits for ,Pre-emption; Order 20 Rule 14
• Suits for dissolution of Partnership; Order 20 Rule 15
• Suits for accounts between principal and agent; Order 20 Rule 16
• Suits for partition and separate possession; Order 20 Rule 18
• Suits for foreclosure of a mortgage; Order 34 Rules 2-3

Besides above the Court has a power to pass a preliminary decree in cases not expressly provided in the Code.

In Phool Chand Vs Gopal Lal A.I.R. 1967, S.C. 1470 , the Apex Court has decided that “C.P.C. does not prohibits passing of more that one preliminary decree, if circumstances justify the same and it may be necessary to do so”.

Final Decree: A decree may be final in two ways.

• When no appeal is filled against the decree within the prescribed period or the matter has been decided by the decree of the highest Court;
• When the decree so far as regards the Court passing it, completely dispose of the suit.

“A final decree is one which completely disposes of the suit and finally settles all the questions in controversy between the patties and nothing further remains to be decided thereafter. Under the special circumstances, more than one final decrees can be passed in the same suit, e.g. Where two or more causes of actions are joined together, there can be more than one final decree.

Partly Preliminary and Partly Final Decree: For example, in a suit for possession of immoveable property with mesnes profits, the Courta)

• decrees possession of the property, and
• directs an enquiry into the mesne profits.

The former part of the decree is finally while the later part is only preliminary because the Final Decree for mesne profits can be drawn only after enquiry and ascertainment of the due amount. In such a case, even though the decree is only one, it is Partly Preliminary and Partly Final. Order: Section -2 (14)

An order means the formal expression of any decision of a Civil Court which is not a decree. The adjudication of a court of law may be either Decree or Order; and cannot be both.

Difference Between Decree and Order

2(3) “Decree-Holder” means any person in whose favour a decree has been passed or an order capable of execution has been made.

2(5) “Foreign Court” means a Court situate outside India and not established or continued by the authority of the Central Government;

2(6) “Foreign Judgment” means the judgment of a foreign Court;

2(8) “Judge” means the presiding officer of a Civil Court;

2(9) “Judgment” means the statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order.

2(10) “Judgment-Debtor” means any person against whom a decree has been passed or an order capable of execution has been made.

2(11) “Legal Representative” means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermediates with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued.

2(12) “Mesne Profits” of property means those profits which the person in wrongful possession of such property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received therefrom, together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the person in wrongful possession;

The owner of property or any other person who is entitled to have possession of property has a right to the possession of his property and when such person is deprived of such a right by any other person, person, then he is entitled not only to receive back possession of that property but also to damages for wrongful possession from that person.

“Mesne Profits” of property means those profits which the person in wrongful possession of such property actually received therefrom, together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the person in wrongful possession.

The mesne profits are compensation, which is penal in nature. A decree for mesne profits is to compensate the person who has been kept out of possession even though he was entitled to possession thereof. Against whom Mesne profits can be claimed?

The mesne profits can be claimed with regard to immoveable property only. Generally, person in wrongful possession and enjoyment of immoveable property is liable for mesne profits. A decree for mesne profit can be passed against a tresspasser or a person against whom a decree for possession is passed, or against a mortgagee in possession of property even after a decree for redemption is passed or against a tenant holding over at will after a notice to quit has been served him.

To ascertain and provide mesne profits it is not what the plaintiff has lost by being out of possession but what the defendant gained or might reasonably and with ordinary prudence have gained by such wrongful possession. Since interest is an integral part of mesne profits, it has to be allowed in the computation of mesne profits itself.

2(14) “order” means the formal expression of any decision of a Civil Court which is not a decree;

2(16) “prescribed” means prescribed by rules;

2(18) “rules” means rules and forms contained .in the First Schedule or made under section 122 or section 125.

• Civil Procedure with Limitation Act 1963 by C K Takwani  (One of the best book for CPC)
• The Key To Indian Practice (A Summary Of The Code Of Civil Procedure) by Mulla
• Ratanlal and Dhirajlal’s the Code of Criminal Procedure

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Institution of a Suit under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908: The First Stage of a Civil Proceeding

This article is authored by Kirti Bhushan, a student of Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi. This article focuses primarily on how a civil suit can be instituted under the procedural laws of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter as CPC, 1908). The article lays down a general pattern of a general civil suit and deals with the provisions related to the same under CPC, 1908.

Suit: Meaning

The term ‘suit’ has not been defined in the CPC, 1908. Generally, it is understood as a proceeding that commences upon the presentation of a plaint in a civil court. A plaint is a statement in writing of a cause of action in which the relief claimed is set out in detail. The Black’s Law Dictionary defines a suit as the proceeding initiated by a party or parties against another in the court of law.

Ordinarily, there appears a minute difference between the suits filed under the CPC, 1908 and the other suits filed under various legislative enactments.  The suit filed under CPC, 1908 has a particular format and it is a civil proceeding instituted by presenting a plaint whereas in other suits e.g. matrimonial are generally instituted by presentation of a petition by either party to the suit.

Provisions regarding institution of a suit are specified under Section 26 and Orders I, II, IV, VI, VII.

Essentials of a Suit

There are four essentials of a suit which are explained as follows:

Parties (Order I)

In a suit, there must be at least two parties i.e. the plaintiff and the defendant. There is no bar as to the maximum numbers of plaintiffs or defendants. There are two categories of parties viz. necessary party and proper party. The significance of the necessary party in a suit is that the presence of such a party is vital to the constitution of the suit and the relief is sought against such party and without such party, no effective order can be passed. A proper party is one in whose absence an effective order can be passed, nonetheless whose presence is necessary for a complete and final decision on the question involved in the proceeding.

Subject Matter

There must be a subject matter i.e. a set of facts which have to be proved to enable the plaintiff to get the relief claimed by him. It includes the course of action. The subject-matter can be movable as well as immovable property and the details regarding the same has to be given in the plaint by the plaintiff for a successful filing of his plaint and getting the relief claimed in the plaint.

Cause of Action (Order II, Rules 3, 6 and 7)

It contains a set of facts or circumstances that the plaintiff is required to prove before he can succeed. It serves as the foundation of the suit. It includes all the essential facts which constitutes the right of a plaintiff and its alleged infringement and thus it is an antecedent to the filing or institution of any suit. The facts must be mentioned in clear and unambiguous terms. A person is a party to the suit if there lies a cause of action against him. It is important to note that every plaint must disclose a cause of action or some act done by the defendant else the Court is under a duty to reject such a plaint as per Order 7, Rule 11.

Relief claimed by the plaintiff

Relief is a remedy in legal sense for wrong accrued to the plaintiff. No court will give relief unless it is specifically claimed by the parties to the suit. There are two types of reliefs: Specific and Alternative.

Institution of a Suit under CPC, 1908

There are various stages of a suit viz. institution of suit or commencement of suit, service of summons, written statements, first hearing and framing of issues, production of evidence and final hearing, arguments, judgment, preparation of a decree and its execution. The focus of this article is to deal with the first stage i.e. Institution of a suit. The institution of a suit consists of the following steps:

Filing of a plaint

It is noteworthy that the term plaint is not defined under CPC, 1908. According to the dictionary meaning, plaint is a statement in writing on grounds of complaint made to a court of law and asking for redress of the grievance. Order VII deals with the format of a plaint and contains various rules. 

Pleadings are defined as pleadings as “a plaint or a written statement” in Order VI Rule I of the CPC, 1908. Plaint is the first step to initiate the filing of a suit. The document containing various facts and circumstances regarding the Plaintiff’s grievance is filed by the plaintiff after hiring a counsel and such a document is called a plaint.

Amendment of Proceedings

The Court may, at any stage of the proceedings, allow either party to alter or amend its pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just (Rule 17 of Order VI of CPC, 1908), and all such amendments shall be made when it is necessary for determination of real question in controversy or is just and proper or is necessary in the interest of justice.

Place of suing

The place of suing plays a major role in a suit as it directly deals with the authority of a court to pass a decree. Choosing a court depends upon the contents of plaint one is filing. It refers to the jurisdictional aspect. Section 9 of CPC, 1908 provides that the Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature except in suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. The jurisdiction of a court is decided by the legislature and the parties to a suit, by the framing of the plaint, cannot interfere into the extent of this jurisdiction. But the parties can choose a court amongst various courts if they have the same jurisdiction. In Mt. Ananti vs Chhannu And Ors AIR 1930 All 193, the Court held:

“The Plaintiff chooses his forum and files his suit. If he establishes the correctness of his facts, he will get his relief from the forum chosen.”

Section 15 of Civil Procedure Code provides that every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade competent to try it. On the filing of the suit, the Court must ascertain whether it has jurisdiction to entertain it. In cases where the jurisdiction is challenged by filing a petition by the defendant(s) to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The want of jurisdiction is merely an irregularity of the proceedings and the Court has the power to rectify it. 

Presentation of the plaint: When the suit commences?

The moment the plaint is filed it leads to the institution of the suit as it is provided in Section 26 of CPC, 1908 provides that every suit under shall be instituted by the presentation of a plaint or in such other manner as may be prescribed and the contents of such plaint shall be proved by an affidavit as per the amendment of 2002. Thus, a plaint is rightly filed by complying with the provisions of Order IV Rule 1 of CPC, 1908. The plaint may be presented either by the affected person himself, or by his advocate or by his recognised agent or by any person duly authorised by him. 

Time and Place of Presentation

Ordinarily, the presentation of a plaint must be on a working day and during the office hours. But there is no rule regarding it be made either at a particular place or time. A judge, therefore, may accept a plaint at his residence or any other place even after office hours, though he is not bound to accept it. If not too convenient, the judge must accept the plaint, if it is the last day of limitation. 

Registration of Suits

Rule 2 of Order IV provides that the Court shall cause the particulars of every suit to be entered in a book to be kept for the purpose and called the Register of civil suits after the Court fees have been paid correctly in the Court having pecuniary Pecuniary jurisdiction specifies the monetary jurisdiction of the Court and divides the Courts on a vertical basis. It is different for different district Courts in various states e.g. Currently, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Delhi courts is · Suits amounting to Rs.1 – Rs.20, 00,000 and territorial jurisdiction. Territorial jurisdiction deals with the area wise jurisdiction of various courts which is decided by taking numerous factors into consideration.

 Such entries shall be numbered in every year according to the order in which the plaints are admitted. Thus, after the presentation, the suit will be numbered along with being scrutinised by the Stamp Reporter.

Once all these steps have been taken care of, a suit is successfully instituted before a Civil Court. 

NOTE: A suit will only be instituted successfully if it is not hit by the provisions of Res Sub Judice i.e. the matter is pending before a court already who is capable of executing a award which is asked for in new plaint OR else it is not hit by Res Judicata i.e. the matter has been already decided by a Court in a case involving the same parties in the same cause of action.

The journey of a suit from filing of plaint to its institution in the court is dependent on numerous factors. All these conditions are provided in the CPC,1908 in a proper procedural framework. Such procedural formalities point out to the exclusivity of CPC, 1908 and due to these, delays are caused in both institution of a suit and passing of a decree in civil suits. The legislators certainly realised this and therefore, there is a provision in CPC, 1908 under Section 89 which provides for the settlement of certain disputes outside the Court through conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat and mediation. Also, under Order XXXVII there is a provision for Summary Suits which provide quick and efficacious relief. This has certainly led to settlement of disputes through Courts as well as Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism which is currently in vogue in India.

Latest Posts

• Job opportunity at EXO Edge, Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar, Punjab, India: Apply Now!!
• Internship opportunity at Vishwas Advisors, Kalyan, Maharashtra, India: Apply Now!!
• Internship opportunity at Kulfi Collective, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India: Apply Now!
• Job opportunity at The Neotia University, Diamond Harbour, West Bengal, India: Apply Now !!
• Job opportunity at Morgan Stanley, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India: Apply Now!!
• Job opportunity at VISA INTELLIGENCE CONSULTANCY LLP, New Delhi, Delhi, India: Apply Now!!  
• Job opportunity at Amazon Web Services (AWS), Gurugram, Haryana, India: Apply Now!!
• Job opportunity at Stelcore Management Services Private Limited, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India: Apply Now!!
• Job opportunity at Zscaler, Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar, Punjab, India: Apply Now!!
• Job opportunity at Irish Expert, Delhi, India: Apply Now!!
• Job opportunity at UnitedLex · Gurgaon, Haryana, India: Apply Now!
• Internship opportunity at Vineforce · Nabha, Punjab, India: Apply Now!!
• Current Affairs (2)
• competitions (132)
• Webinar (1)
• Course and Workshops (107)
• Debates (46)
• Eassy Competitions (69)
• Fellowships & Scholarships (56)
• Guest Blogs (6)
• important (29)
• Internships and Jobs (2,317)
• interviews (8)
• moot court (180)
• Job Opportunity (1,191)
• Call for papers (475)
• Quizes,fests and others (298)
• Work Opportunity (836)
• Administrative Law (17)
• Arms Act (2)
• Case Analysis (205)
• Company law (36)
• Constitutional Law (143)
• Consumer Protection Act (17)
• Contract Law (62)
• Criminal Law (140)
• Cyber Law (13)
• Environmental Laws (30)
• Evidence Act (20)
• Family Law (12)
• General (205)
• International Humanitarian Law (8)
• International law (23)
• Jurisprudence (13)
• labor laws (7)
• Maritime Laws (1)
• Partnership Act (2)
• personal law (33)
• Taxation (10)
• Transfer of Property (2)
• career advice (2)
• Top Stories (524)
• Uncategorized (720)
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• August 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• November 2019

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Lexpeeps Pvt Ltd provides tailored legal and business solutions, empowering businesses, startups, and professionals with innovative, comprehensive support and cutting-edge services for over half a decade.

Partners with Us

© Copyright 2024 Lexpeeps All Rights Reserved | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

"A PLATFORM FOR LEARNING"

Framing and Institution of Suits- CPC,1908

The term ‘suit’ is used to refer to a proceeding by a person(s) against another in a Court where the plaintiff seeks remedy. In short, in CPC, it is a civil proceeding instituted by the presentation of a plaint. Frame and institution of suits are few of the basic requirements to file a suit.

Table of Contents

FRAMING OF SUITS

The provision under Order 2 Rule 2 is based on the principle that a defendant should not be contested twice for the same cause[1].

The principle in this provision is provided to counteract two evils:

• Splitting up of claims
• Splitting up of remedies.

In Naba Kumar v. Radhashyam[2], the Privy council had stated ‘the rule that is in question aims to deal with the wrong of splitting causes of action. In a suit the whole of any claim should be mentioned which the plaintiff is entitled and if he omits to sue for any such relief, he is not allowed to claim it in a second suit.

Thus, the object is to prevent filing of a number of suits relating to the same transaction.

INCLUSION OF WHOLE CLAIM

Whole of the claim of the plaintiff in respect of a cause of action should be written in every suit. Rule 1 says that every matter in the dispute, shall be finally disposed of,  ‘as far as practicable’  to prevent any further litigation.

Here, the expression ‘as far as practicable’, means that the court will see in every case that whether for the plaintiff, it was practicable to frame his suit to include a cause of action which he had omitted or had intentionally relinquished.

SPLITTING OF CLAIM

In every suit should be included the whole of the claim to which the plaintiff is entitled.  If the plaintiff did not include or intentionally relinquished any portion of such claim then he won’t be afterwards permitted to file a suit in respect of such portion that was omitted or relinquished. In Kunjan Nair v. Narayanan Nair[3], it was also held that the true object of law would not stand fully served by holding that the provisions under Order 2 rule 2 be applied only if the previously filed suit is disposed of and does not apply in any situation when a subsequent suit is filed during the pendency of the previous suit. This rule will apply to both the situations[4].

ORDER 2 AND RES JUDICATA

Order 2 provides for prohibition of splitting of claims as:

• That every suit should have the whole of the claim included, the plaintiff is entitled but to bring that suit within the court’s jurisdiction, he may give up any portion of such claim.
• When the plaintiff omits or intentionally relinquishes any portion of his claim, then he cannot sue afterwards in respect of that.
• If a person is entitled to more than one relief in respect of the same cause of action and without the permission of the court he omits to sue for one of such reliefs, cannot afterwards sue for such it.

Talking about res judicata, it differs from the above provision as:-

• Res judicata refers to a plaintiff’s duty to bring forward all the grounds of attack in support of his claim; while order 2 rule 2 only requires a plaintiff to claim all reliefs arising from the same cause of action.
• Res judicata refers to both the parties and prevents a suit as well as a defense, while provision of order 2 rule 2 refers only to a plaintiff and bars a suit[5].

Following three conditions must be satisfied for the applicability of Order 2:-

• Same cause of action : To bar the second suit by applying order 2 rule 2, it is to be proved that it is based on the same cause of action on which the previous suit was based, or else there could not be bar to the subsequent suit. The cause of action should be the same and not merely be similar. The plaintiff cannot split into parts to bring a separate suit in respect of those parts. The test, not a conclusive one, to check if the cause of action in the second suit is the same or not is whether the same evidence will assist and help both the previous and subsequent suits and if the subsequent suit is based on different causes of action, this rule will not apply[6].Even if they arise from the same transaction but cause of action is not the same, the rule does not apply. 
• One of several reliefs : For example, a plaintiff files a for breach of contract and does not claim one or more of the reliefs, then a subsequent suit is barred for such portion so omitted. Thus, this rule applies when the plaintiff is entitled to two or more reliefs in respect of the same cause of action and omits to sue all such reliefs. However, this rule does not apply when the right of relief in respect of which the subsequent suit is filed, did not subsist at the time of the first suit[7]; or the petitioner couldn’t have claimed that relief in the previous suit[8].  ‘A right that a litigant didn’t know or which did not exist at the time of the previous suit, cannot be regarded as a ‘portion of his claim’ within the meaning of this rule.
• Leave of court : This rule does not apply when the leave of the court is obtained. Thus, if omission is with the court’s permission, then a subsequent suit in respect of the same cause of action is not barred. Such leave can be obtained at any stage[9]. It is on the discretion of the court to grant leave.

JOINDER OF CLAIMS

The joinder of claims is provided in provisions of rules 4 and 5.

Rule 4 says that in any suit for the repossession of an immovable property, a plaintiff is not entitled to join any claim without the leave of the court. But there are certain exceptions to this rule in which plaintiff can join a claim even without the leave of the court-

• Where claim is for mesne profits or arrears of rent in respect of the property;
• Where claim is for damages for breach of any contract under which the property or any part thereof is held; and
• Where the claim in which aid is sought, is found on the same cause of action.

Rule 5 deals with suits by or against: executors, administrators and heirs. No claim by or against these persons, in their representative capacity, may be joined with claims by or against them personally in the same suit , except in following cases-

• When the personal claims is with reference to the estate he represents; or
• When he was entitled to or liable for those claims jointly with the deceased whom he represents.

The objective behind such provisions is to prevent a representative from uniting the assets of his testator with his own properties.

JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

Rules 3 and 6 deal with the provisions of joinder of causes of action.

Rule 3 allows joinder of some causes of action of one suit in certain situations but is subject to the provisions of this Code. It provides for following types of situations:-

1.  One plaintiff, one defendant and several causes of action: – In such cases, the complainant may join in the same suit several causes of action. But if in the opinion of the court the joinder of causes of action may cause unsettling or delay in the trial, then the court may order separate trials.

2. Joinder of plaintiffs and causes of action:- In case of more than two complainants and several causes of action , the complainants may join the causes of action in a single suit against the defendant if they are interested jointly. But they may be joined on the fulfillment of following conditions[10].

• The causes of action must be arisen from the same transaction; and
• Common questions of law or fact must be involved.

If these conditions remain unfulfilled, and the plaintiffs are not jointly interested then the suit will be bad for misjoinder of plaintiffs and causes of action.

3. Joinder of defendants and causes of action: – In case of one complainant and more than one defendants and several causes of action, the complainant may join in a single suit several causes of action, if the defendants are jointly interested in the causes of action, provided following conditions are fulfilled[11].

• The relief claimed should be based on the same act or transaction; and

If defendants have been joined in cases where the causes of action are separate and the right of aid claimed is not based on the same act or transaction or any of the above conditions remain unfulfilled, then it will be a misjoinder of defendants and causes of action.

4. Joinder of plaintiffs and defendants; and causes of action :- In case of two or more plaintiffs, defendants and several causes of action, the plaintiffs may unite such causes of action in a single suit when all the plaintiffs are jointly interested and also the defendants are interested in the same.

In addition, the following must be noted with regards to Joinder of Parties:

• If plaintiffs are not interested jointly- the suit will be bad for misjoinder of plaintiffs and causes of action;
• If defendants are not interested jointly- the suit will be bad for multifariousness;
• If  both plaintiffs and defendants are not jointly interested- the suit will be bad for double misjoinder.

https://legalreadings.com/bonded-labour-in-india/

INSTITUTION OF SUITS

The provisions for institution of suit is provided u/s 26 and order 4 of the code. Order 4 deals with the parties to a suit, addition, deletion and substitution of parties and the objection as to non-joinder and mis-joinder.

A suit is instituted on the presentation of a ‘plaint’. The expression ‘plaint’ has not been defined in the Code but it means the exhibition of an action in writing[12].

PRESENTATION OF PLAINT

Section 26 and Order 4 Rule 1 provide that every suit must be instituted by the presentation of a plaint in duplicate or in any other manner that may be prescribed by the Code, by the plaintiff himself or his representatives.

TIME AND PLACE OF PRESENTATION

There is no rule as to a particular place or particular time of presentation but a plaint shall be presented before the court or to such officer as the court appoints[13]. Generally, it is presented on the working days and during the office hours but a judge may accept it at his residence or at any other place, any time. Though, the judge is not bound for such an acceptance, but if it is the last day of limitation and is not too inconvenient for him, he shall accept it. 

After acceptance, the particulars are to be entered in a book called register of suits[14]. The particulars to be entered are: parties to the suit, cause of action, jurisdiction of court, valuation, etc.  After presentation, the plaint is scrutinized by the stamp reporter and the defects, if any, are removed by the plaintiff or his advocate and then the suit will be numbered.

SUITS BY INDIGENT PERSON

Order 33 deals with the suits by ‘paupers’. The object is to make it possible for indigent persons to institute any suit without payment of any court fees. Rule 1 gives the definition of an indigent person, as: 

• A person who is not possessed of  ‘sufficient means’ so that he can pay the fee. Here ‘sufficient means’ refers to the ability of that person to raise money by available lawful means for fee, or
• The person who is not entitled to property worth Rs 1000.

Rule 2 provides for the following particulars that are required to be contained in an application to sue by an indigent person:-

• Particulars of plaint;
• Details of any movable or immovable property belonging to that person with the estimated value;
• Signature and verification as under order 6 rules 14 and 15.

Such application shall be presented by the applicant unless exempted by the court and in case of two or more plaintiffs, any of them can present it [15].

Following are the cases in which the plaint shall be rejected[16]:-

• If the application is not framed and presented as prescribed; or
• If the applicant is not an indigent person; or
• If that person applying has, within two months till such presentation, disposed of any of his property fraudulently or to get permission to sue an indigent person; or
• If there’s no cause of action; or
• It the applicant has entered into an agreement with reference to subject matter in which the interest is obtained by another person; or
• It the suit is barred by law; or
• If someone else has entered into an agreement with that person applying to back costs of the litigation.

The rejection order is appealable[17].

An inquiry to examine the applicant and his property may be ordered by the court or the court may adopt the inquiry made by the Chief Ministerial Officer[18].

If permission is granted to sue as an indigent person, the suit shall proceed in the ordinary manner, only the difference being the applicant is not required to pay the court fees.

If permission is rejected, the court shall grant time to the applicant to pay the fees[19] and such order shall be a bar to a subsequent similar application but may sue in an ordinary manner.

If the indigent person succeeds in the suit, the court may recover it from the party and if he fails in the suit, the court shall order the plaintiff to pay required fees and costs[20].

SUITS AGAINST A MINOR

Order 32 provides for the procedure of suits to which minors are parties, object being to protect the interests of minors.

Rule 3 provides that in a suit against a minor, the court shall appoint a guardian ad litem which shall continue in all the proceedings and also in an appeal or revision and execution of a decree till he is terminated as a guardian.

Any decree against a minor without guardian or next friend is null and void. Also ,it is not illegal or be cancelled only on the basis that such next friend or guardian has an interest in subject matter adverse to that of the minor. But if the minor is prejudiced by such reason then it is a valid ground for setting aside such decree[21].

Rule 4 provides that any person who has attained majority and is of sound mind can be appointed as a guardian or next friend provided his interest is not adverse to that of the minor. In absence of such a person, the court may appoint an officer of the court to be the guardian.

Rules 5-7 provides for the powers and duties of a guardian or next friend as:-

• He cannot receive any amount or movable property on behalf of minor by way of compromise, without the leave of the court nor can enter into any compromise on his behalf in the suit;
• Application for leave of the court should be accompanied by an affidavit and in case the minor is represented by a pleader, then with a certificate of the pleader that such compromise is beneficial to the minor.

Any settlement without the permission of the court is voidable against all parties. If the compromise is avoided by the minor then it ceases to be effective[22].

Rules 8-11 provides for the retirement, removal or death of the guardian or next friend. Before getting a fit person for substituting him and giving security,  the next friend or guardian cannot retire. The court may remove a next friend or guardian, if it is satisfied that:-

• His interest is not favorable to the interest of the minor; or
• He is related with the opposite party such that it is unlikely that the interest of the minor will be saved and safeguarded by him; or
• He doesn’t discharge his duty; or
• Ceases to stay in India during pendency of suit; or
• Any other justifiable cause.

On such retirement, removal or death, the proceedings in the suit shall be stayed until a next friend or guardian is appointed.

Rules 12-14 provides for what happens when the minor attains majority. On attaining majority, the minor plaintiff may adopt any of the following:-

• May proceed with the suit and then shall apply for an order discharging the next friend or guardian and for leave to proceed in his own name.
• May renounce the suit and apply for its dismissal. 
• May apply for dismissal of the suit on the ground of unreasonableness.
• In case he is a co-plaintiff , he may reject the suit and may apply to have his name removed as co-plaintiff.

SUITS AGAINST A DEAD PERSON

There are two different views in this regard. First view is that a suit against a person who is dead when the suit was instituted is non est and has no legal effect; second view is that such suit is not void ab initio and can be continued against legal representatives of the deceased defendant. Thus, a suit filed against a dead person by the plaintiff without the knowledge about the death of the defendant and takes prompt action as soon as he comes to know about it, then he cannot be deprived of his remedy against the legal representatives of the deceased defendant.

[1] Deva Ram v. Ishwar Chand, AIR 1996 SC    378. 

[2] AIR 1931 PC 229.

[3] AIR 2004 SC 1761.

[4] Virgo Industries (Eng.) (P) Ltd. v. Venturetech Solutions (P) ltd., (2013)1 SCC 625.

[5] Inacio Martins v. Narayan Hari Naik, (1993)3 SCC 123.

[6] Arjun Lal v. Mriganka Mohan, AIR 1977 SC 207.

[7] State of M.P. v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1977 SC 1466.

[8] Sidramappa v. Raja Shetty, AIR 1970 SC 1059.

[9] Hare Krishna v. Umesh Chandra, AIR 1921 Pat 193(FB).

[10] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.1 R.1.

[11] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.1 R.3.

[12] Assan v. Pathumma, ILR(1899)22 Mad 494.

[13] Kalyan Singh v. Baldev Singh, AIR 1961 HP 2.

[14] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.4 R.2.

[15] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.33 R.3.

[16] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.33 R.5.

[17] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.43 R.1(na).

[18] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.33 R.1A.

[19] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.33 R.15A.

[20] The Code of Civil Procedure,1908,Or.33 Rr.11,11A.

[21] Ram Chandra v. Man Singh, AIR 1968 SC 954.

[22] Kaushalya Devi v. Baijnath Sayal, AIR 1961 SC 790.

BY KU RICHA SINGH| LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN, UTTRANCHAL UNIVERSITY

Related Posts

Bois locker room, dowry death section 304b: detailed overview, leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• PlayStation 5
• PlayStation VR2
• PlayStation 4
• PlayStation Store
• PlayStation Plus
• Portuguese (Br)
• Spanish (LatAm)
• Spanish (EU)
• Traditional Chinese

Welcome PlayStation 5 Pro, the most visually impressive way to play games on PlayStation

Features including GPU upgrade, advanced ray tracing, and PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution take players to new heights.

UPDATE:  On September 26, 2024, pre-orders will be available directly from PlayStation at  direct.playstation.com  and at participating retailers in territories where direct.playstation.com isn’t available. On October 10, 2024, pre-orders will be available at all other participating retailers.

Over the last four years since the launch of PS5, we’ve worked hard to continuously evolve the console experience and deliver the great games our players expect from us. Today, I’m incredibly proud to announce the next step in that evolution and welcome PlayStation 5 Pro to the PlayStation family – our most advanced and innovative console hardware to date.

We developed PS5 Pro with deeply engaged players and game creators in mind – as many have asked for a console that runs even higher fidelity graphics with smoother frame rates at 60FPS. We achieved this on PS5 Pro with several key performance features.*

• Upgraded GPU : With PS5 Pro, we are upgrading to a GPU that has 67% more Compute Units than the current PS5 console and 28% faster memory. Overall, this enables up to 45% faster rendering for gameplay, making the experience much smoother.
• Advanced Ray Tracing : We’ve added even more powerful ray tracing that provides more dynamic reflection and refraction of light. This allows the rays to be cast at double, and at times triple, the speeds of the current PS5 console.
• AI-Driven Upscaling : We’re also introducing PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution, an AI-driven upscaling that uses a machine learning-based technology to provide super sharp image clarity by adding an extraordinary amount of detail.

PS5 Pro provides gamers with amazing graphics at high frame rates. You can hear Mark Cerny, lead architect for PS5 Pro, discuss the key innovations from PS5 Pro in the following video presentation. This presentation provides a deep dive into the key performance features that make PS5 Pro truly special.

Other enhancements include PS5 Pro Game Boost, which can apply to more than 8,500 backward compatible PS4 games playable on PS5 Pro. This feature may stabilize or improve the performance of supported PS4 and PS5 games. Enhanced Image Quality for PS4 games is also available to improve the resolution on select PS4 games. PS5 Pro will also launch with the latest wireless technology, Wi-Fi 7, in territories supporting this standard. VRR and 8K gaming are also supported.

It’s humbling to see how game creators have embraced the latest technology from PS5 Pro, and several games will be patched with free software updates for gamers to take advantage of PS5 Pro’s features. These games can be identified with a PS5 Pro Enhanced label within their title. Some games you can look forward to include blockbuster hits from PlayStation Studios and our third-party partners, such as Alan Wake 2, Assassin’s Creed: Shadows, Demon’s Souls, Dragon’s Dogma 2, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth, Gran Turismo 7, Hogwarts Legacy, Horizon Forbidden West, Marvel’s Spider-Man 2, Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart, The Crew Motorfest, The First Descendant, The Last of Us Part II Remastered, and more. 

We kept the look of the PS5 Pro consistent with the overall PS5 family of products. You’ll notice the height is the same size as the original PS5, and the width is the same size as the current PS5 model to accommodate higher performance specs. Players can add an Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc Drive, or swap out console covers when they become available.

Download the image

PS5 Pro fits perfectly within the PS5 family of products and is compatible with the PS5 accessories currently available, including PlayStation VR2, PlayStation Portal, DualSense Edge, Access controller, Pulse Elite and Pulse Explore. The user interface and network services will also remain the same as PS5.

The PS5 Pro console will be available this holiday at a manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) of $699.99 USD, £699.99 GBP, €799.99 EUR, and ¥119,980 JPY (includes tax). It will include a 2TB SSD, a DualSense wireless controller and a copy of Astro’s Playroom pre-installed in every PS5 Pro purchase. PS5 Pro is available as a disc-less console, with the option to purchase the currently available Disc Drive for PS5 separately.

PS5 Pro will launch on November 7, 2024 and will be available at participating retailers and directly from PlayStation at direct.playstation.com. Preorders will begin on September 26, 2024.

Our PS5 journey would not be possible without the millions of players that have supported us through the years and have shared with us their love of gaming. Whichever console option players choose, whether it’s PS5 or PS5 Pro, we wish to bring everyone the very best gaming experience that fits their needs. 

*Features only available on select PS5 games that have been enhanced for PS5 Pro when compared with the PS5. PS5 Pro enhanced features will vary by game.

Did you like this? Like this

Join the Conversation

But don't be a jerk!

Please be kind, considerate, and constructive. Report inappropriate comments to [email protected]

587 Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trending Stories

The evolution of Astro Bot’s adorable character design

Corey Brotherson PlayStation Blog Contributor

Celebrating 30 years of PlayStation: My First GT, digital soundtracks, “Shapes of Play” collection – and there’s more to come

Isabelle Tomatis Vice President, Global Marketing, Sony Interactive Entertainment

Destiny 10th Anniversary: PlayStation Studios devs reflect on their time as Guardians

Tim Turi (he/him) Content Communications Manager, Sony Interactive Entertainment

EA Sports FC 25: hands-on report

PlayStation Plus Monthly Games for August: LEGO Star Wars The Skywalker Saga, FNAF Security Breach, Ender Lilies: Quietus of the Knights 

Adam Michel Director, Content Acquisition & Operations, Sony Interactive Entertainment

PlayStation Plus Monthly Games for April: Immortals of Aveum, Minecraft Legends, Skul: The Hero Slayer

Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 arrives only on PS5 October 20, Collector’s & Digital Deluxe Editions detailed

James Stevenson Community Director, Insomniac Games

PlayStation Plus Game Catalog for June + PS5 Game Streaming news update for Premium members

Nick Maguire VP, Global Services, Global Sales and Business Operations, SIE

Please enter your date of birth.

Sorry, you may not access this content..