1. C. R. P. No. 94 of 1953 and C. R. P. No. 95 of 1953 are against the orders of the learned Additional District Judge of Trivandrum in C. M. P. No. 7044 dated 22-11-1952 in O. S. No. 275 of 1951 and C. M. P. No. 6961 dated 22-11-1952 in O. S. No. 278 of 1951 respectively, granting the prayer of the defendant for striking out certain portions of the plaints and replications in those suits under Order VI Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Order VI Rule 16 which is a re-production of the English Order XIX Rule 27 provides that:

"The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any matter in any pleading which may be unnecessary or scandalous or which may tend to prejudice, embarass or delay the fair trial of the suit."

3. There is no doubt that nothing can be scandalous which is relevant (per Cotton, L, J., Fisher v. Owen, (1878) 8 C. D. 645) and that the jurisdiction which is given to the court under Order VI Rule 16 is one which ought to be exercised with great care and caution (A. I. R. 1925 Calcutta 860 and A. I. R. 1951 Nagpur 412).

4. There can also be no doubt that the court has a duty to discharge towards the public and the