Pleadings and subsequent settlement: plaint rejection failed, but the suit became infructuous after the claimed relief ceased to survive.

An application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 must be assessed only on the plaint averments, and defence material is ordinarily irrelevant. Subsequent events may still be considered where they fundamentally affect the relief claimed. Here, post-suit settlement documents allowed use of the trade name and incorporation of new entities, and the plaintiff acted on that arrangement by opening a new entity and conducting business through it. As the original injunctive relief no longer survived, the plaint was not rejected under Order VII Rule 11, but the suit was treated as infructuous and dismissed under the Court's inherent powers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaint could be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the suit had nevertheless become infructuous in view of the subsequent settlement documents so as to warrant dismissal under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: For an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, only the averments in the plaint can be considered, and later defence material cannot ordinarily be looked into. However, the Court may take note of subsequent events where they have a fundamental impact on the relief claimed. The settlement documents executed after institution of the suit showed that the parties had agreed to allow the use of the trade name and to permit incorporation of new entities, and the plaintiff had acted upon the arrangement by opening a new entity and carrying on business under it. In those circumstances, the original injunctive relief claimed in the suit no longer survived.

Conclusion: The plaint was not rejected under Order VII Rule 11, but the suit was held to have become infructuous and was dismissed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Ratio Decidendi: Subsequent events that fundamentally extinguish the relief claimed may be considered under the Court's inherent powers to dismiss a pending suit as infructuous, even though rejection under Order VII Rule 11 must be tested on plaint averments alone.

---