A proper assessment of a plaint must be conducted to determine the presence of valid cause of action under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner impugns Ext.P6 order of the Court of the learned 1st Additional Munsiff, Ernakulam, whereby, her petition filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure , seeking rejection of the plaint filed by the respondent, has been dismissed, saying that it contains a valid cause of action, and since she has not filed a written statement to refute its contents.

2. Smt.Nikitha Susan Paulson – learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently argued that, even going by Ext.P1 plaint, it would render it indubitable that the allegations of the plaintiff are contrary to even basic common reasoning or common sense; and hence that it cannot be allowed to be prosecuted further. She then pointed out that, as per the cause of action pleaded, the plaintiff alleges that her client has installed four or five air conditioners, without saying how this caused any prejudice to him. She submitted that, therefore, in the absence of a valid cause of action, Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure would come to her client's aid, particularly because she is a 66 year old lady, who will be put to great inconvenience, if she is forced to prosecute a futile suit.

3. I notice from the files that, even though service of summons from this Court has been validly completed on the respondent, he has chosen not to be present in person or to be represented through counsel; inferentially guiding me to the impression that he has nothing to offer in opposition to the various reliefs sought for in this writ petition.

4. I have examined Ext.P6, which is the order impugned in this Original Petition.

5. As rightly argued by Smt.Nikitha Susan Paulson, the learned Munsiff has rejected the petitioner's application, filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure , merely saying that there is a cause of action stated in paragraph 9 of Ext.P1 plaint and because her client did not file a written statement in substantiation of her contentions.

6. I am afraid that the ambit of the Order VII Rule 11(a)

of the Code of Civil Procedure is not in the manner as has been noticed by the learned Munsiff because, these are the averments in the plaint which should have guided the learned Judge in taking a decision, and not the merits of the causes of action or reliefs sought.

7. In the case at hand, the petitioner specifically says that no valid cause of action has been disclosed in the plaint, but the learned Munsiff has rejected it by saying that “cause of action is stated in paragraph 9 of plaint” (sic). It also then records that the defendants (the petitioners) have not filed written statement and counter by substantiating their contentions” (sic), as a further reason to dismiss the petitioner's application.

8. I am afraid that the afore conclusions of the learned Munsiff cannot find favour in law because, the plaint ought to have been scrutinised to verify if any of the vitiating factors mentioned in Order VII Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure are attracted. This, not having been done and merely for the reason some cause of action is shown in the plaint, but without this Court assessing whether it would fall within the mischief of the afore provision, I cannot grant imprimatur to Ext.P6.

In the afore circumstances, this Original Petition is allowed and Ext.P6 is set aside; consequentially, directing the learned Trial Court to reconsider the application of the petitioner, after hearing both sides, thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu APPENDIX OF OP(C) 811/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 211 OF

2020 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE FIRST ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O. S. NO. 1045 OF 2019 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE SECOND ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM Ex