Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, while considering an application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Court can look beyond the plaint and rely on the defendant's written statement or other defence materials, and whether the High Court was justified in upholding the appellate court's order remitting the matter for trial on all issues.
Analysis: The governing principle is that an application under Order VII Rule 11 has to be decided on the basis of the averments in the plaint alone. The defence set up in the written statement or materials outside the plaint cannot be taken into account for determining whether the plaint is barred. On the facts, the grounds founded on Order IX Rules 8 and 9 and Order XXIII Rule 1(3) and Rule 4(b) were not attracted, because the earlier dismissal had been restored and, in any event, the suits did not relate to the same relief or property. The High Court correctly applied the settled law and upheld the appellate court's view that rejection of the plaint was not warranted.
Conclusion: The application under Order VII Rule 11 could not be allowed on the basis of defence pleas, and the order remitting the matter for decision on all issues was .
Ratio Decidendi: An application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 must be decided only on the plaint averments, and the defendant's written statement or other external materials are irrelevant to that inquiry.