Cause of action in a plaint must survive on its own averments; otherwise rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) follows.

A plaint must be read as a whole on its own averments to determine whether a surviving cause of action exists under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC. Where the original co-plaintiff's name had been deleted and possession of the rooms had already been surrendered in compliance with an earlier order, the factual foundation of the suit was treated as having ceased to subsist. As no independent cause of action remained for the continuing plaintiff, rejection of the plaint was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaint, after deletion of the name of the original co-plaintiff and in the light of the possession having been handed over in compliance with the earlier order, disclosed any cause of action so as to avoid rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Analysis: The plaint was required to be examined on its own averments as a whole. On that scrutiny, the foundation of the suit was found to have ceased after the co-plaintiff's name was deleted and the possession of the rooms had already been surrendered pursuant to the earlier order. In that situation, the remaining plaintiff had no surviving independent cause of action, and the plaint attracted Order VII Rule 11(a).

Conclusion: The rejection of the plaint was upheld and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: If, on a fair reading of the plaint as a whole, the pleaded foundation of the suit has ceased to subsist and no independent cause of action remains, the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

---