Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Cause of Action - Definition and Main Points The cause of action refers to the set of facts that form the foundation of a suit, giving it its cause. It is described as the cause of action for which the suit is brought and a bundle of facts which has to be ascertained by reading the plaint averments in its totality ["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"], ["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"], ["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"]. The Supreme Court has clarified that the term is of wide import and not explicitly defined in law but broadly encompasses the facts that justify the claim ["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"].
Cause of Action Occurs After Filing Suit When a cause of action arises after the filing of a suit, it generally does not affect the validity of the initial institution but can impact subsequent proceedings. The initial cause of action must exist at the time of filing, but courts examine whether the facts pleaded disclose a valid cause. If the cause arises after the suit is filed, it may not be relevant unless it relates to ongoing or continuing causes ["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"], ["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"]. For example, in eviction cases, notice periods and delays are considered to determine if a cause of action existed at the time of filing; if the suit is filed after the expiry of the notice period, it may lack a cause of action ["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"].
Impact of Cause of Action Occurring Post-Filing If new facts arise after filing that form a separate or continuing cause, courts may consider whether these justify amendments or additional suits. However, a cause of action must generally exist at the time of filing; mere subsequent events do not automatically create a new cause unless they are part of the same transaction or continuing wrong ["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"].
Rejection of Plaint for Lack of Cause of Action Under Order VII Rule 11, a plaint can be rejected if it does not disclose a cause of action or if the suit appears barred by law. Courts scrutinize the plaint as a whole to determine whether the facts disclosed constitute a cause of action at the time of filing. If the cause of action is found to be non-existent or illusory, the plaint can be rejected ["K. Varathan, Proprietor, M/s. Cinetekk VS Prakash Babu Nakundhi Reddy, Proprietor, M/s. Shankarnag Theatre - Madras"], ["Seema Fatima vs U. Ambuja - Telangana"], ["P.V.ALEXANDER vs MUTTURUTHY SREE BHUVANESWARI TEMPLE @ KARNA KARNA TEMPLE - Kerala"].
Limitations and Cause of Action Delay in filing or the occurrence of the cause after filing does not automatically invalidate the suit, but if the cause of action is barred by limitation, the suit can be dismissed. The cause of action must be timely, and courts examine whether the facts pleaded fall within the statutory period ["Purvam Satyanarayana vs Nandyala Rama Krishna Reddy - Telangana"].
Summary The cause of action must exist at the time of filing the suit and be properly pleaded in the plaint. If it arises after filing, courts may consider whether it constitutes a continuing or fresh cause, but generally, causes arising post-filing are not grounds for maintaining or rejecting a suit unless related to ongoing or successive wrongs. Rejection of plaint for lack of cause of action is permissible if the facts do not disclose any basis for the claim ORDER VII Rule 11, ["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"].
References:["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"]["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"]["Avirineni Jhansi Lakshmi vs M/s Vijayalakshmi 70 MM - Telangana"]["K. Varathan, Proprietor, M/s. Cinetekk VS Prakash Babu Nakundhi Reddy, Proprietor, M/s. Shankarnag Theatre - Madras"]["Seema Fatima vs U. Ambuja - Telangana"]["P.V.ALEXANDER vs MUTTURUTHY SREE BHUVANESWARI TEMPLE @ KARNA KARNA TEMPLE - Kerala"]["SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - Consumer National"]["Jasubhai Lilabhai Patel vs Kamleshbhai Jasubhai Patel - Gujarat"]["Shantilal Shankarbhai Patel Since Deceased VS Patel Dalsukhbhai Nanabhai (Deceased) - Gujarat"]["Dharam Pal VS Shahnaz Begum - Himachal Pradesh"]["1rm Fitness Equipment VS Priyanka Baru - Bombay"]["State Bank Of India, A Statutory Corporation Constituted Under The State Bank Of India Act, 1955 Having Its Corporate Centre At State Bank Bhavan vs State Bank of India - Bombay"]["Tarvindrarsingh Mahendrasingh Dhillan VS Ambadas Asaram Mhaske - Bombay"]["Ved Parkash Yadav VS RWA Krishna Apartment - Delhi"]["G. Nagaraj VS B. P. Mruthunjayanna - Supreme Court"]["Dharam Pal VS Shahnaz Begum - Himachal Pradesh"]
In civil litigation, timing is everything. A common query among litigants is: if a cause of action occurs after filing suit in plaint, what are the implications? This question touches on fundamental principles under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), particularly regarding the validity of the plaint and the suit's maintainability. Understanding this can prevent premature filings or help navigate amendments effectively.
This post breaks down the concept, drawing from judicial precedents and statutory provisions. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
The cause of action is the bundle of facts that gives rise to a right to sue. As pithily stated in a National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) ruling, cause of action means the cause of action for which the suit is brought. cause of action is cause of action which gives occasion for and forms the foundation of the suit. SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - 2012 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 47BANKIM MANDAL vs CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR, HUDA & ANR.
The Supreme Court has clarified that the term cause of action is neither defined in the Act nor in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but is of wide import. SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - 2012 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 47 This underscores its foundational role: without it, no suit can stand.
Yes, generally. A plaint must aver facts showing a cause of action has accrued. Courts assess this solely from the plaint's averments, without evidence. Mrs. Seema Fatima vs Smt U. Ambuja - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 53132
If filed prematurely—before accrual—the suit may be dismissed as non-maintainable. For example:- In partition suits, plaintiffs must show possession or title-based rights at filing. Mrs. Seema Fatima vs Smt U. Ambuja - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 53132- In recovery suits, cause arises post-demand or refusal. The Cheyyar Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. , by its Administrator, Tiruvannamalai District VS Messrs. S. V. Sugar Mills Ltd. , represented by its Vice President, Chennai - 2009 Supreme(Mad) 5394
Rejection under CPC Order 7 Rule 11: If no cause is disclosed, the plaint is rejected. Section 46 CPC outlines options upon plaint presentation: allowance, return for amendment, or rejection. SLEBERT v. NEW ASIA TRADING CO. LTD.
This scenario raises questions of prematurity or evolving disputes:
Filing before accrual is risky. Courts expect plaintiffs to investigate facts beforehand. It would be manifestly unreasonable to expect every prospective plaintiff to make a preliminary investigation, but plaints must still stand on their own. SLEBERT v. NEW ASIA TRADING CO. LTD.
In property disputes, if conversion to non-agricultural use post-filing alters facts, it doesn't retroactively validate a deficient plaint. NAGESH @ NAGSHETTY S/O HANMANTHAPPA MANTHALE Vs SMT.GUNDAMMA AND ORS
Under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, plaints can be amended if new facts emerge, provided they don't introduce a new cause of action fundamentally altering the suit's nature. However, core cause must exist initially.
Consumer forums may condone delays if sufficient cause is shown, but this applies post-accrual. The consumer forum, however, for the reasons to be recorded in writing may condone the delay in filing the complaint if sufficient cause is shown. SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - 2012 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 47
In sugarcane price disputes, courts upheld claims within limitation from the accrual date (e.g., government order date). The Cheyyar Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. , by its Administrator, Tiruvannamalai District VS Messrs. S. V. Sugar Mills Ltd. , represented by its Vice President, Chennai - 2009 Supreme(Mad) 5394
Suits on different causes aren't barred by res judicata. E.g., a suit for injunction (peaceful possession) differs from one for title-based possession. Both the suits are based entirely on different and distinct cause of action. Mubin VS Sahabuddin - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 2428
Rent disputes illustrate: cause arose when defendant falsely claimed rent rates. Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Cooperative society rep. By its Managing Director, Chennai VS S. R. Ejaz, rep. By his Power Agent Muralidhar T. Balani - 2009 Supreme(Mad) 3801
In criminal contexts (analogous), time limits strictly apply, e.g., under Bombay Police Act Section 161. K. K. Patel VS State Of Gujarat - 2000 4 Supreme 160
To avoid pitfalls:1. Verify accrual: Ensure all facts (right + violation + damage) exist before filing.2. Draft robust plaints: Clearly state cause in para 12 or dedicated section. Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Cooperative society rep. By its Managing Director, Chennai VS S. R. Ejaz, rep. By his Power Agent Muralidhar T. Balani - 2009 Supreme(Mad) 38013. Seek amendments timely: For evolving facts.4. Check limitation: Article 113 (3 years residuary) or specific periods apply from accrual.5. Consumer/Alternative Forums: More flexible on delays with reasons.
| Scenario | Likely Outcome ||----------|---------------|| No cause at filing | Rejection/Dismissal Mrs. Seema Fatima vs Smt U. Ambuja - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 53132 || Cause post-filing, amendable | Allowed if not new suit || Continuing cause | Suit proceeds Mubin VS Sahabuddin - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 2428 || Vexatious repeat | Struck off Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Cooperative society rep. By its Managing Director, Chennai VS S. R. Ejaz, rep. By his Power Agent Muralidhar T. Balani - 2009 Supreme(Mad) 3801 |
A cause of action typically must exist when filing the plaint; post-filing accrual risks prematurity and rejection. Courts prioritize plaints disclosing live disputes, as seen in NCDRC and High Court rulings. SRI. RAMESH CHANDER MAHER vs SRI. SARBASWAR BHYUAN - 2012 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 47NAGESH @ NAGSHETTY S/O HANMANTHAPPA MANTHALE Vs SMT.GUNDAMMA AND ORS
Key Takeaways:- Define and disclose cause clearly.- Avoid premature suits; wait for accrual.- Use amendments judiciously.- Always check limitation from accrual date.
For tailored guidance, engage a civil lawyer. Stay informed to strengthen your legal strategy!
#CauseOfAction #CivilSuitIndia #LegalBlog
Pithily stated, ause of actionmeans the cause of action for which the suit is brought. ause of actionis cause of action which gives occasion for and forms the foundation of the suit. ... The consumer forum, however, for the reasons to be recorded in writing may condone the delay in filing the complaint if sufficient cause is shown. ... In para No.13, it has been held by the Honle Supreme Court; he term ause of actionis neither defined in the Act nor ....
After filing of the said suit, the I.A under revision has been filed to reject the plaint for lack of cause of action. ... of filing the second suit i.e. ... While so, the cause of action in O.S.No.652 of 2023 do not reveal any cause of action on 21.09.2023 which forms the basis for filing the fresh suit on 26.09.2023 by paying Court fee on 21.09.2023 itself. ... In a suit for eviction on the basi....
After filing of the said suit, the I.A under revision has been filed to reject the plaint for lack of cause of action. ... of filing the second suit i.e. ... While so, the cause of action in O.S.No.652 of 2023 do not reveal any cause of action on 21.09.2023 which forms the basis for filing the fresh suit on 26.09.2023 by paying Court fee on 21.09.2023 itself. ... In a suit for eviction on the basi....
The fact that the Plaintiff/Petitioner served the Defendant/respondent the copies of Plaint/Petitions before filing the Suit/Petition would not amount to institution of Suit/filing Petition. ... There is no dispute that the date of filing the Plaint would be counted for the purpose of limitation. However, that does not mean that the Suit was validly instituted by filing the Plaint. The Plaint, whi....
Now, it has to be examined whether the plaint discloses any cause of action for filing the suit. ... It was further averred that a clear cause of action for filing the suit for partition is mentioned in the plaint and further, being co-owner, the plaintiff is deemed to be in possession of the suit schedule property and therefore, the contention that the suit is liable to be rejected on the grounds of ... Learned co....
But it is only with reference to the return or the rejection of a plaint that the term " order " occurs in the Code. ... Section 46 specifies the three courses open to the Judge upon presentation of a plaint, namely "the allowance of the filing of the plaint", or the " return of the plaint for amendment ", or " the Rejection of the plaint ". ... It would be manifestly unreasonable to expect every prospective plaintiff to make a preliminary inves....
that there was no cause of action for filing the suit as the appellants had failed to exercise due diligence and had neglected to perform an action which is obligatory upon them in light of the fact that on 25 th September, 2020 i.e on the date of filing of the suit, trademark was not at all registered ... It is apparent that since on the date of filing of the suit, alleged trademark was not registered and, therefore, there was no question of it's in....
Now, it has to be examined whether the plaint discloses any cause of action for filing the suit. ... It was further averred that a clear cause of action for filing the suit for partition is mentioned in the plaint and further, being co-owner, the plaintiff is deemed to be in possession of the suit schedule property and therefore, the contention that the suit is liable to be rejected on the grounds of ... Learned co....
KALLAPPA S/O VEERBHADRAPPA AUSE SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.R.S (A) JAGANATH S/O KALLAPPA AUSE, AGED ABOUT-55 YEARS, Per contra, learned counsel for the defendants submitted that the plaintiff in very many words, had mentioned in the plaint that the suit properties were all converted for non-agricultural use and a layout was ... In the plaint, the plaintiff clearly described that the suit properties were converted for non-agricultural use by defendant ....
Pithily stated, ause of actionmeans the cause of action for which the suit is brought. ause of actionis cause of action which gives occasion for and forms the foundation of the suit. ... In para No.13 it has been held by the Honle Supreme Court he term ause of actionis neither defined in the Act nor in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but is of wide import. ... The consumer forum, however, for the reasons to be recorded in writing may condone the delay in f....
That the cause of action finally arose on or about a week ago when the defendants failed to put the plaintiffs into peaceful vacant possession of said residential house and cause of action still recurring one.” As per the averments in the plaint of this suit after the judgment and decree dated 17.5.2012 passed by the learned Appellate Court in the first round of litigation declaring the plaintiffs as owner, they issued a legal notice dated 11.6.2012 cancelling the licence of the defendants and requested them to surrender the possession of the house in dispute to them and when they failed to ....
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any difference in the price agreed upon and the price declared, and whether the defendant is not liable to pay the difference of Rs.36.29 per metric tonne ? iv) Whether there is any cause of action in filing the suit? v) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the suit claim ?
The cause of action for filing the suit was explained in para 12 of the plaint thus :- The cause of action for the above suit arose during 2005, when the defendant filed E.S.No.20/ 2005 before the III Small Causes Court, Chennai falsely stating that the rack rent is Rs.1890/-.
3,75,000/- towards refund of earnest money which has been admitted by the respondent. The ause of action has lastly arose in favour of appellant on 19. Resultantly the respondent shall not be entitled to restrict the period of limitation to six months under Section 53-B (2) for the claim of the appellant and the ordinary law of limitation shall be applicable. 2. 1976 when the respondent had sent a cheque for rs.
This issue has to be answered on the basis of the assertions made in the plaint as well as the cause of action for filing of the suit. It is the refusal of the State of Andhra Pradesh to agree to the constitution of an authority, thereby making the scheme un-implementable, which gave the cause of action to file the present suit on the basis of which the suit has been filed and taking into account the fact that the State of Andhra Pradesh has never agreed to the constitution of the Krishna Valley Authority, which was thought to be the back-bone of Scheme “B”, it cannot be sa....
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
