Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Nalina Bai, D/o. Late Sharada Bai – Appellant
Versus
Vishwanath Singh, S/o. Late Bapu Singh – Respondent
ORDER :
(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)
Petitioners-plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.675/2022 are at the doors of this Court calling in question an order dated 30.03.2024 by which the concerned Court answers the application in I.A.No.3 filed by defendant Nos.1 to 7, 24 and 38 seeking rejection of the plaint partially.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the application itself was filed for rejection of the plaint partially and not the entire plaint. Since the issue stands covered by plethora of judgments of the Apex Court that a plaint cannot be rejected partially, the petition on this short ground deserves to succeed.
3. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.S.P.Kulkarni, appearing for the respondent No.3 would submit that he be reserved liberty to file an appropriate application before the concerned Court.
4. The Apex Court in VINOD INFRA DEVELOPERS LTD. v. MAHAVEER LUNIA & ORS., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1208, at paragraphs 8, 9.5, 9.6 and 9.7, has held as follows:
"8. The position of law is that rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC is permissible only when the plaint, on its face and without considering the defence, fails to disclose a cause of action, is barred by any la
A plaint cannot be partially rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; each cause of action must be adjudicated separately, affirming judicial examination necessity.
A plaint must establish a clear cause of action; limitation issues involving mixed questions of fact and law cannot be decided without trial evidence.
A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC based on alleged contradictions in the claims; it must be assessed as a whole to determine if it discloses a cause of action.
A plaint cannot be rejected in part; prior contractual rights supersede subsequent title claims, reinforcing the binding nature of earlier agreements in property disputes.
Rejection of plaint – Scope of petition is very limited and entire averments in plaint are to be considered, but not one sentence in plaint.
The court discussed the scope of rejection under Order VII, Rule 11 of C.P.C and referred to legal precedents to determine the cause of action and the limited scope of rejection under the rule.
The plaint must disclose a cause of action, and the permissibility of oral averments contradicting a written document depends on the applicability of relevant provisions of the Evidence Act.
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it is barred by limitation or fails to disclose a cause of action, emphasizing the necessity for clear and truthful averments.
Rejection of plaint – Plaint cannot be rejected in part.
(1) Rejection of plaint – Suit cannot be dismissed merely on the ground of insufficient Court fee – Law mandates that Plaintiff be afforded opportunity to rectify such deficiency.(2) Agreement to sel....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
