Plausibility of partial plaint rejection under civil procedure fails where the plaint survives against other defendants.

Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure permits rejection only of the plaint as a whole; it cannot be split and rejected only against one defendant if a cause of action or relief survives against others. Where the plaint remains maintainable in part, objections to particular parties or reliefs must be addressed under the appropriate procedural route, not through selective rejection under Rule 11(d). The Court held that rejecting the plaint only qua the bank was impermissible and a jurisdictional error, and it set aside that order.

---

---

Issues: Whether a plaint can be rejected only qua one defendant under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether such partial rejection can be sustained when the plaint survives against the remaining defendants.

Analysis: The relief under Order 7 Rule 11(d) is confined to rejection of the plaint itself on the grounds specified in the provision. The governing principle is that the plaint must be accepted or rejected as a whole. If the plaint discloses a surviving cause of action against some defendants or in respect of some reliefs, the court cannot bifurcate it and reject it only against one defendant. Where a party seeks rejection only qua a particular defendant, the proper course is not an Order 7 Rule 11(d) rejection; objections to particular reliefs or parties may be examined under other procedural provisions at the appropriate stage.

Conclusion: Partial rejection of the plaint only against the bank was impermissible and amounted to a jurisdictional error. The appeals were therefore allowed and the order rejecting the plaint qua the bank was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a plaint can be rejected only in its entirety or not at all; it cannot be rejected selectively against one defendant while allowing the suit to proceed against others.

---