What Points we have discussed in

previous lectures
A short historical survey of the conception
of civil procedure in India before the
advent of British.
Decree, Judgment & Order Similarities
& Dis-similarities
Rejection of Plaint
Judgment Debtor/ Decree Holder
Mesne Profit
Various Stages of a Civil suit.
Jurisdiction and kinds of jurisdiction
Amendment of Pleadings
Drafting of Plaints
Return of Plaint
W.S. Set off & Counter Claim
Particulars added in a Plaint
Name of the court in which suit has to be instituted -
O7R1(a)
Name description & place of residence of plaintiff
O7R1(b)
Name description & Place of residence of defendant
O7R1(c)
Statement about the fact that P. or D. is minor or of
unsound mind O7R1(d)
Facts , cause of action and when it arose.- O7R1(e)
Statement about the jurisdiction of the court
O7R1(f)
The relief claimed by the plaintiff O7R1(g)
Statement relating to set off or relinquishment a
portion of his claim with specific amount O7R1(h)
Statement of value of the subject matter for the
purpose of jurisdiction & court fees as described in the
court. O7R1(i)
Plaint shall be verified
Plaint shall be affidavited
Plaint shall be filed in duplicate O7R11(e)
Production of document on which the plaintiff sue or
relies -O7R14
Relief to be specified O7R7
Procedure of admitting plaints O7R9








PLEADING ORDER VI,VII & VIII C.P.C.
Pleading means Plaint & Written statement
O6R1
Every pleading (plaint or W.S. contains)
A statement in a concise form of the material
facts O6R2(1)
It shall be divided in to paragraph O6R2(2)
Date, sum & Numbers figure & words both
O6R2(3)
Form of pleading Appendix A O6R3
Pleading about misrepresentation, fraud,
breach of trust, wilful default, undue
influence, condition precedent, departure,
Denial of contract, notice, malice, knowledge,
implied contract or relation & presumption of
law be stated in the pleading O6R4 to 12
It be signed by the party and his/ her pleader.
O6R14
Address for service of notice - 06R14
Verification & affidavit of pleading be made
O6R15
Striking & amendment of pleading O6R17
Failure to amend after order O6R18


Basic Rules of pleadings
Pleading means Plaint & W.S.

Plaintiffs pleading Plaint

Defendants pleading Written Statement

Defendants pleading in which defendant
set up a claim against Plaintiff with a view
of offset the original claim Set-off

Defendants Pleading in which defendant
made a claim against the Plaintiff
independent in nature Counter Claim
It amount to filing a cross suit Court
pronounce judgement on both original
Claim and the counter claim.
Fundamental Principles of Pleading applicable on both
Plaint & Written Statement (Set off & Counter Claim)
Pleading to state material facts and not
evidence
Every pleading shall contain, and contain
only, a statement in a concise form of the
material facts( on which the party
pleading relies for his claim or defence)
Party must not state the evidence by
which they are to be proved.
Every pleading shall, when necessary, be
divided into paragraphs, numbered
consecutively, each allegation being, so
far as is convenient, contained, in a
separate paragraph.
Dates, sums and numbers shall be
expressed in a pleading in figures as well
as in words.
Material Facts
All facts upon which plaintiffs cause of
action or defendants defend depends.
All the primary facts which must be
proved at the trial by a party to
established the existence of a cause of
action or his defence are material facts (
AIR 1976 SC 744.
Facts are of two types
Facts probanda facts required to be proved
i.e. material facts
Facts probantia the facts by means of which
they are to be proved i.e. particular or
evidence.
A pleading must contain fact probanda
Where ever misrepresentation, fraud,
breach of trust, willful default or undue
influence in the pleading, particulars with
dates and item should be stated.
AIR 1976 SC 744 ::1977(I) SCC 511, UDHAV SINGH VS.
MADHAV RAO SCINDIA
P. N. BHAGWATI AND R. S. SARKARIA,
The present case is related with an Election petition in which a
pleading was made in para.11 of the plaint like this :-
"that, on or before 22-2-71, Shri Mohan Prasad Ojha, a Congress
Worker of Village Umri (Tehsil Guna) was threatened at pistol
point by the workers of the respondent with his consent, Shri
Shiv Pratap Singh and others of Umri threatened not to vote and
canvass in favour of the Congress candidate, Deorao Krishnarao
Jadhav and threatening with dire consequences. '

The reply of the this para respondent states that:-
"the allegation of the petitioner that on or before 22-2-1971 Shri
Mohan Prasad Ojha, a Congress Worker of the village Umri (Tehsil
Guna) was threatened at pistol point by the workers of the
respondent with his consent is denied. It is also denied that with the
consent of the respondent, Shri Shiv Pratap Singh and others of
Umri threatened him not to vote and canvass in favour of the
Congress Candidate Shri Deorao Krishnarao Jadhav and threatened
him with dire consequences. This para is also lacking in material
particulars as to who were the alleged workers, what was their
names' their addresses, castes etc. It cannot therefore, be enquired
into. The allegation is incorrect, baseless and vague. It is also vague
because particulars as to when, where and in whose presence the
alleged consent of the respondent was given are not mentioned. ''
aHardwari Lal's case (AIR 1964 SC 1366)
(supra):
Sheodhan Singh v. Mohan Lal Gautam. (1969) 3
SCR 417 = (AIR 1969 SC 1024) Samant N.
Balkrishna v. George Fernandez, (1969) 3 SCR
603 = (AIR 1969 SC 1201) and Hardwari Lal v.
Kanwal Singh, (1972) 2 SCR 742 = (AIR 1972
SC 515 ).
Return of Plaint O7 Rule 10 & 10A
Court shall return the plaint for presentation
before the proper court in the following
circumstances :-
* lack of territorial jurisdiction
* lack of pecuniary limit
* lack of jurisdiction relating to subject
matter

Procedure at the time of Returning
Procedure at the time of returning the plaint:-
The Judge returning plaint shall endorce :-
date of presentation
date of return
Name of parties presenting plaint
Appellate court has also power to transfer suit to
proper court
Directing the court to transfer suit from one
court to another shall not effect the power of
parties to raise question of jurisdiction in which
plaint is filed to try the suit.
Court may direct on the point of limitation. Every
such return is always subject to provisions of
limitation act.

Rejection of Plaint O7R11
The Plaint shall be rejected on the following
grounds :-
Plaint does not disclose cause of action
When relief claimed is under-valued, on demand
by the court to correct the valuation within
specified time the plaintiff failed to do so
When relief claimed is proper valued but
insufficient stamp paid on the plaint, on demand
by the court the plaintiff failed to do so within
specified time.
Where from the statement in the plaint it
appears that suit is barred by law.
Where it is not filed in duplicate.
Where plaintiff failed to comply with the
provisions of Rule 9 i.e. after passing order for
service of summon upon the defendants, the
plaintiff fails to provide the copies of the plaint
duly stamped within 7 days from the date of
such order in the office of the Civil court.
Procedure for rejection & Whether
presentation of fresh plaint barred if
rejected due to this reason.
Rejection of Plaint :-
When a Plaint is rejected the judge shall
record and order to that effect with the
reasons for such order

Where rejection of plaint does not indicate
presentation of fresh suit :-
The rejection of the plaint U/O7 R 11 shall not
of its own force preclude the plaintiff from
presenting a fresh plaint in respect of the
same cause of action.

Defect of misjoinder of parties & misjoinder of cause
of action not a ground for rejection of plaint
AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 1247 "Prem Lala Nahata. v. Chandi Prasad
Sikaria"
Coram : 2 S. B. SINHA AND P. K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, JJ.
Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), O.7, R.11(d), O.1, R.1, R.2 - PLAINT - CIVIL
PROCEDURE - Rejection of plaint - Defect of misjoinder of parties and
causes of action - Not a ground for rejection of plaint.
2005 (4) Cal HN 664, Reversed.

An objection of misjoinder of plaintiffs or misjoinder of causes of action, is a
procedural objection and it is not a bar to the entertaining of the suit or the
trial and final disposal of the suit. The Court has the liberty even to treat the
plaint in such a case as relating to two suits and try and dispose them off on
that basis. On the scheme of the Code, there is no such prohibition or a
prevention at the entry of a suit defective for misjoinder of parties or of
causes of action. The Court is still competent to try and decide the suit,
though the Court may also be competent to tell the plaintiffs either to elect
to proceed at the instance of one of the plaintiffs or to proceed with one of
the causes of action. On the scheme of the Code of Civil Procedure, it
cannot therefore be held that a suit barred for misjoinder of parties or of
causes of action is barred by a law, here the Code. It is open to the Court to
proceed with the suit notwithstanding the defect of misjoinder of parties or
misjoinder of causes of action and if the suit results in a decision, the same
could not be set aside in appeal, merely on that ground, in view of S. 99 of
the Code, unless the conditions of S. 99 are satisfied. Therefore, by no
stretch of imagination, can a suit bad for misjoinder of parties or misjoinder
of causes of action be held to be barred by any law within the meaning of
O. 7, R. 11 (d).
Plaint can not be rejected o the basis of allegations made by
defendant in his WS or in an application for rejection of plaint
AIR 2006 SUPREME COURT 1828 "Mayar (H. K.) Ltd. v. Owners and Parties, Vessel
M. V. Fortune Express"
= 2006 AIR SCW 863
(From : Calcutta)*
Coram : 2 Mrs. RUMA PAL AND PRAKASH PRABHAKAR NAOLEKAR, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 867 of 2006 (arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 17906 of 2004), D/-
30 -1 -2006.
Mayar (H. K.) Ltd. and Ors. v. Owners and Parties, Vessel M. V. Fortune Express and
Ors.
(A) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), O.7, R.11 - PLAINT - Plaint - Cannot be rejected on basis
of allegations made by defendant in his written statement - Plaint disclosing cause of
action - Requires determination by Court - Mere fact that in opinion of Judge,
Plaintiff may not succeed, cannot be ground to reject plaint.
The plaint cannot be rejected on the basis of the allegations made by the defendant
in his written statement or in an application for rejection of the plaint. The Court has
to read the entire plaint as a whole to find out whether it discloses a cause of action
and if it does, then the plaint cannot be rejeccted by the Court exercising the powers
under O. 7, R. 11. Essentially, whether the plaint discloses a cause of action, is a
question of fact which has to be gathered on the basis of the averments made in the
plaint in its entirety taking those averments to be correct. A cause of action is a
bundle of facts which are required to be proved for obtaining relief and for the said
purpose, the material facts are required to be stated but not the evidence except in
certain cases where the pleadings relied on are in regard to misrepresentation,
fraud, wilful default, undue influence or of the same nature. So long as the plaint
discloses some cause of action which requires determination by the Court, mere fact
that in the opinion of the Judge the plaintiff may not succeed cannot be a ground for
rejection of the plaint. In the instant case, the averments made in the plaint, do
disclose the cause of action and, therefore, the High Court has rightly said that the
powers under O. 7, R. 11 cannot be exercised for rejection of the suit filed by the
plaintiff appellants. Similarly, the Court could not have taken the aid of S.10 of the
Code for stay of the suit as there is no previously instituted suit pending in a
competent Court between the parties raising directly and substantially the same
issues as raised in the present suit. (Paras 11, 12)

Eviction suit filed prior to cause of action i.e. prior to fixed period of lease
objection relating to maintainability of suit not pressed at preliminary stage what
shall be the effect ?
AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 1891 "Vithalbhai
Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India"
Coram : 2 R. C. LAHOTI, C.J.I. AND G. P.
MATHUR, J.
Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), O.7, R.11 - Transfer of Property Act (4 of
1882), S.111 - EVICTION - PLAINT - DISMISSAL - LEASE -
Eviction suit - Cause of action - Suit filed prior to expiry of fixed
term of lease - Maintainability - Plaintiff found entitled to relief
prayed for by time written statement came to be filed -
Objection as to maintainability of suit, not pressed by
defendant at preliminary stage - Dismissal of suit on ground of
its being premature, when it came to be decided after lapse of
over eight years - Not justified.
In appeal respondent made allegation for casting votes
in the name of certain religious leader in public
meetings no averment in evection petition that said
appeal was made in the public
AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 2379 "Harmohinder Singh Pradhan v. Ranjeet
Singh Talwandi"
= 2005 AIR SCW 2512
(From : (2003) 3 Rec Civ R 807 (P and H))
Coram : 3 R. C. LAHOTI, C.J.I., G. P. MATHUR AND P. K.
BALASUBRAMANYAN, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 8315 of 2003, D/- 28 -4 -2005.
Harmohinder Singh Pradhan, Appellant v. Ranjeet Singh Talwandi and
others, Respondents.
Representation of the People Act (43 of 1951), S.123(3) - ELECTION -
RELIGION - PLEADINGS - PLAINT - APPEAL - Election petition - Corrupt
practices - Religious appeal - Respondent allegedly made appeal for casting
votes in name of certain religious leaders in public meetings - No averment
in election petition that said appeal was made in name of his religion or to
refrain voters from voting for petitioner on ground of his religion -
Distinction has to be drawn between appeal simpliciter by religious
leaders and appeal to vote or refrain from voting on ground of
religion emanating from religious leaders - Former is not
vulnerable while latter is - In election petition necessary averments of
facts constituting appeal on ground of religion were deficient - Rejection of
election petition at threshold on ground of not disclosing cause of action - Is
proper.
Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), O.7, R.11, O.6, R.16. (Paras 12, 13, 14, 15)

O7R14(4)

Documents relied on the Plaint
O7R14- Newly amended vide amendment act 2002
At the time of presentation of suit the
Plaintiff has to produce the documents on
which he relies and in his possession.

The filing of such document ca be made
either annexing to the plaint or in the list
of documents.

But this can not be produced and entered
into evidence without leave of the court.
O7R14(4)
AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 3353 "Salem
Advocate Bar Assocn. v. Union of India"
Coram : 3 Y. K. SABHARWAL, D. M.
DHARMADHIKARI AND TARUN CHATTERJEE,
JJ.
Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), O.7, R.14(4) (as substituted by
Amendment Act of 1999) - DOCUMENTS - PLAINT -
WITNESS - Production of documents for cross-examination -
Words "plaintiff's witnesses - Mentioned by mistake in O. 7,
R. 14(4) - Words "plaintiff's witnesses to be read as
defendant's witnesses" till legislature corrects mistake.
(Paras 36, 37)

All the Amendments in C.P.C.
Amendments
_______|___________
In the pleadings In the order sheet
| |
1.By addition of parties -O1R10 1 In judgement,
order,decree
2. By amendment in plaint When; any clerical,
arithmetical mistake
any defendant added -O1R10(4) any accidental
slip S.152 by itself or on
motion of party
3. By Striking out pleading of 2 General Power
to amend S153
Opponent O6R16 amending any
defect or error in
the proceeding
4. Amendment of pleading of 3. Power to amend
decree or order
party who pleaded it O6R17 where appeal
dismissed U/O41R11 by
appellate, court of first
instance shall be
amend confirming the decree or order.
S.153A

O1R10
O1R10 Suit in the name of wrong plaintiff
A suit instituted in the name of Wrong plaintiff,
It is doubtful that it has been instituted in the name
of right plaintiff
Court may at any stage of the suit
Court is Satisfied that the suit has been instituted
through a bona fide mistake
Court is satisfied that it is necessary for
determination of the real matter in dispute
Court may for the said purpose order any other
person to be substituted or added as plaintiff
upon such term court ma think fit.

O1R10(2)

Amendment in Order sheet

Points on Amendment
1.Points considered U/O 1R10 CPC, if court thins fit that:-
- For the determination of real question in controversy
-presence of party is necessary in order to enable the
court for complete adjudication and settle all the
question involved in suit

2. Where ever a defendant be added, necessary
amendment shall be taken place in the plaint and copy
of the plaint be served upon the new defendant.

3. Amendment is necessary for the purpose of
determining the real question in controversy between
the parties / as per proviso amendment shall not be
taken place after commencement of trial with only one
exception that in spite of due diligence the party could
not have raised the matter before commencement of
trial.

Important Rulings on the point
of Pleadings
O6R1 C.P.C.
AIR 1999 SC 3029
In construing a Plea in the pleading the court
must keep in his mind that a plea is not an
expression of art or science but an expression
through words to place fact and law of ones
case for relief. Such an expression may be
pointed, precise, some times vague but still
could be gathered what he wants to convey
through only by reading the whole pleading,
depends on the person drafting it.
AIR 1988 SC 1796
Question of appreciation of evidence is not to
be pleaded instead it is duty of court to
consider whether documents produced by
party proved facts in issue.
AIR 1987 SC 1242(1247)
It is not desirable to place under emphasis on
form, instead the substance of the pleading
should be considered.
AIR
Effect of lack of Pleadings
AIR 1987 SC 1242 + 2002(8) JT 288
In absence of pleading, evidence, if any,
produced by the parties can not be
considered
AIR 1996 SC 112(114)
Plea as to adverse possession not raised in
pleading _ No amount of proof can be
substitute pleadings which are the foundation
of claim of a litigation.
AIR 2003 SC 4319
IN absence of any pleading whatsoever on
question as to whether child was given in
adoption by his father or brother, the court
can not go into same even if evidence was
adduced.

Court Cannot make out a new
case not pleaded
AIR 2003 SC 160
Suit for partition Plaintiff claiming only half
share in property can not be declared
owners of the entire property.
AIR
Proceeding under C.P.C. Vs
Under 226 of the constitution of
India Vs 125 Cr.P.C.
AIR 1988 SC 2181(2186)

In a pleading under C.P.C. In Plaint or W.S.
facts and not the evidence are required to be
pleaded.

In a pleading under Art. 226 of Constitution of
India Writ Matter In Writ Petition or
Counter affidavit not only the facts but also
evidence in proof of such facts have to be
pleaded and annexed to it.

In a proceeding U/S 125 Cr.P.C. Provisions of
C.P.C. not apply due to the reason that it is
not the Civil Pleading.

In this regard view of the H.Cs.
are different.
Material Facts
AIR 2001 SC 3689 + AIR 1963 SC
1607(1612)
Material facts means all facts upon which the
plaintiffs cause of action or the defendants
defence defendants, in other words, all those
facts which must be proved in order to
establish the existence of the cause of action
or defence.


Facts : Facta probanda Facts on which the
party pleading relies for his claim or defence.

Facts probantia Facts by means of which
parties are to proved the case.
Fraud, Custom
When relief has been claimed on the
ground of fraud then in that case it must
be pleaded specifically since it is a
material facts. AIR 1975 Orissa 97, Kant.,
Raj., Bombay, Cal., Delhi, Pat (DB) of the
same view.
Plea of custom be pleaded specifically
since it is a material facts. AIR 1973 Pun.
387

Amendment of Pleadings