Introduction:
The provisions of Order VII of the Civil Procedure Code,1908, specify some grounds for rejecting paint. That provision enables the Court to dismiss the lawsuit at any stage. There are many grounds for rejecting the Plaint. In this article, we discuss all the reasons for dismissing the suit.
The civil procedure code has a significant meaning that covers all kinds of civil litigation. When any litigation is filed as a lawsuit, whether in the civil or commercial Court, under the law, the Civil Procedure Code,1908, governs all types of litigation of a civil nature.
The Court has to verify the paint with all necessary legal aspects before the lawsuit is instituted. In that situation, the Court observes various criteria, i.e., the Court may return, dismiss, incur Insufficient court fees, or reject the suit for a reason, etc.
Order VII Rule 11 of CPC specifies some grounds for rejecting the Petition. Below are all the covered grounds.
Grounds for rejection of Plaint:
Order VII Rule 11 of CPC covers the following types of various grounds and circumstances. After considering all legal aspects, the Court can reject the Petition.
- Order VII rule 11 (a), lack of the cause of action in the Plaint:
The absence of a cause of action is one reason the Complaint was rejected. Because the cause of action is a crucial part of the lawsuit, the suit can be the final verdict.
The cause of action covered Order II, rule 2 of the CPC. The reason must be explicitly mentioned in the Plaint. The lack of cause of action in the suit results in the rejection of the Plaint.
Every litigation starts with a specific cause of action so that no one can file litigation against another without any grievance.
As per the provision of order II rule, 2 has also specified that the same cause of action can not be laid for more than one. The main aim of this provision is for a plaintiff to include all of the causes of action in a single suit. Also, the Plaintiff has the right to omit part of his claim.
- Joint cause of action:
As per the provision of Order II, rule 4 of the civil procedure code, a plaintiff can not lay the joint cause of action against the defendant or more than one defendant. If a plaintiff wants to do so, he has to get prior permission from the Court.
- Misjoinder of Cause of Action:
Multiple causes of action can not be laid in the suit if the Plaintiff joins that type of cause of action. Then, all objections regarding the misjoinder of causes of action should be taken at an earlier stage. This right is believed to be waived if there is no objection to the misjoinder.
In the case of Roop Lal Sathi Vs. Nachhattar Singh (AIR 1982 SC 1559), the Supreme Court observed that It is a trite law that no particular plea has to be considered, and the whole Plaint has to be read. Only a part of the Plaint cannot be rejected, and if no cause of action is disclosed, the Plaint as a whole must be rejected.[1].
In the case of Md. Akhtar Hossain vs. Suresh Singh And Ors (AIR 2004 Cal 99), the Calcutta High Court held that the Plaintiff could not avoid consequences by clever drafting of pleadings and creating confusion in the minds of the Court regarding the cause of action.[2].
Order VII rule 11 (b), The relief claimed is undervalued of the suit:
As per this provision, if a claim made by the Plaintiff is undervalued or the demand made is less than the actual value, the Court can order the Plaintiff to evaluate the suit within the sufficient time given by the Court. If the Plaintiff fails to do so, the said Plaint can be rejected on such grounds.
(Order VII Rule 11(c), Insufficient Stamps duty:
Per the Court Fee Act of 1870 provisions, every lawsuit must pay sufficient court fees at the time of institution. The Court can reject the Complaint on the ground of inefficient stamp duty.
However, the Court’s approach can be liberal before the suit is rejected. The Court can give the Plaintiff reasonable time to correct his mistake. But if the Plaintiff fails to amend the situation, the Court can reject the Planit with a recorded reason.
Order VII Rule 11(d), If the law bars the suit:
The provision of Order VII rule 11(d) deals with the rejection of a suit, which is prohibited by law. If the Plaintiff filed a suit barred by any law, he has no right to the institution of such suit. It might be the reason for the rejection of the ground of a suit.
(Order VII Rule 11(e), When the Plaint not filed in duplicate:
As per this provision, when the Plaintiff files a suit, he must file a duplicate copy along with the original suit, which is a mandatory provision of the civil procedure code. The Court can reject the suit if a plaintiff fails to fulfill that procedure.
(Order VII Rule 11(f), When a plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of rule 9:
When the Plaintiff fails to provide a list of documents that he relies upon and does not submit some copies, which are a basic requirement at the time of filing a suit, the Court can order the suit to be rejected on that ground, too.
In the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu vs. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 189, the Supreme Court observed that O. 7, R.11 to which clauses (e) and (f) have been added, enabling the CourtCourt to reject the Plaint where it is not filed in duplicate or where the Plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of Rule 9 of Order 7. The said clauses, being procedural, would not require the automatic rejection of the Plaint at the first instance. Suppose there is any defect contemplated by Rule 11(e) or non-compliance as referred to in Rule 11(f). In that case, the Court should ordinarily allow rectifying the defects, and if the same is not done, the Court will have the liberty or the right to reject the Plaint.[3].
Modes of rejecting a plaint:
Two modes can be applied for the rejection of the Plaint. The first one is the defendant’s application at any stage of the suit proceedings. The second is the Sue moto’s rejection, which the Court itself files by using Sue moto power according to the provision of CPC.
Conclusion:
The civil procedure code,1908, order VII rule 11, provides various grounds for rejection of the Plaint. As per these provisions, the Plaintiff must care while filing a suit against the defendant. We can also say that the provision enables the defendant to get the appropriate defense in the suit.
Reference:
(1) Roop Lal Sathi V. Nachhattar Singh,(AIR 1982 SC 1559).
(2) Md. Akhtar Hossain vs Suresh Singh And Ors,(AIR 2004 Cal 99).
(3) Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu v. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 189.
Also Read:
When court should not permit withdrawal of suit with liberty to file a fresh suit?
