Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Scope of Order 6, Rule 16 CPC - Striking off pleadings: This rule empowers courts to strike out pleadings in three specific situations, primarily when pleadings are scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of the process of court. The provision was substantively amended by the CPC (Amendment) Act, 1976. The court's power is limited to these circumstances and does not extend to other types of pleadings or reliefs unless falling within these categories ["2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 4215"].
Main Points Regarding Striking Off Reliefs:
Striking off pleadings does not necessarily dispose of the entire matter; it is a procedural remedy that can be used to remove scandalous or irrelevant material from pleadings HUP HIN SOON SDN BHD v CHONG KIN LIN & ANOR.
Order 6, Rule 17 CPC - Amendment of Pleadings:
The phrase either party in Rule 17 is interpreted to mean the specific party seeking amendment, not necessarily the entire set of plaintiffs or defendants ["2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1407"].
Difference Between Striking Out and Amending Pleadings:
An application under Order 8, Rule 9 CPC (relating to additional pleadings or rejoinders) is distinct from an application under Order 6, Rule 17, and they serve different procedural purposes ["2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 4215"] ["2003 0 Supreme(Gau) 92"].
Reliefs and Pleadings:
The court's power to strike out pleadings does not extend to dismissing the entire suit unless the pleadings are fundamentally defective or fall within the scope of the specific grounds provided ["2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 4215"].
Legal Insights:
Analysis and Conclusion:Order 6, Rule 16 CPC provides a limited yet vital power for courts to strike out scandalous, vexatious, or otherwise improper pleadings, safeguarding the integrity of judicial proceedings ["2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 4215"]. Meanwhile, Order 6, Rule 17 CPC facilitates the correction or clarification of pleadings to reflect the true issues and promote fair adjudication, with courts favoring liberal amendments ["2012 0 Supreme(Cal) 113"]. These provisions serve distinct procedural functions—striking out addresses misconduct or abuse, whereas amendments aim to ensure the pleadings accurately represent the parties' claims and defenses ["2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 4215"]. Proper understanding and application of these rules help maintain procedural discipline while ensuring substantive justice in civil litigation.
In civil litigation, form the foundation of a case, outlining claims, defenses, and reliefs sought. But what happens when certain reliefs in a plaint appear frivolous, unnecessary, or abusive? A common query among litigants is: Order 6 Rule 16 for striking off reliefs. Does the , empower courts to strike them out? While Order 6 Rule 16 does not explicitly target reliefs, judicial precedents affirm courts' to do so for justice and efficiency. This post breaks it down, drawing from key legal principles and cases.
Note: This is general information based on legal interpretations and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
governs the content and quality of . It states:
Every pleading shall contain and contain only such allegations as are necessary for the purpose of enabling the parties to define the subject of the suit and to explain its nature. The court may, at any stage of the suit, in such manner and on such terms as it thinks fit. 2007 0 Supreme(J&K) 75
The rule focuses on ensuring are concise and relevant, allowing courts to amend them anytime. Though it emphasizes amendments, it implicitly supports striking out improper parts, including reliefs, to prevent abuse. Courts interpret this broadly to maintain fair trials. 2017 0 Supreme(Ker) 490
Order 6 Rule 16 does not directly mention striking off reliefs, but courts possess under to strike out parts of . This power ensures cases proceed without unnecessary claims. Key points include:
For instance, The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any matter in any pleading- If there is no provision under Order 6 Rule 16 for striking off the where the Court can pass an order under Section 151 C.P.C. 2017 0 Supreme(Ker) 490
Indian courts have consistently upheld this authority. In various rulings, judges have struck out reliefs deemed frivolous or prejudicial. A bare reading of Rule 16 allows striking off if:
Vijay N. VS Kavitha Kanaparthi
In election petitions, courts have struck irrelevant paragraphs lacking connection to core allegations like bribery, viewing them as abusive.
Similarly, in family matters, defenses have been struck for non-compliance with maintenance orders, invoking Order 6 Rule 16 and Section 151 to curb process abuse. 2017 0 Supreme(Ker) 490
permits amendments to , including altering reliefs, but striking out is distinct—rooted in rather than amendment alone. Courts clarify: Order 6, Rule 17 relates only to the power of the Court to allow parties to alter and amend ; and the word '' means only plaints and written statements. 1914 0 Supreme(Mad) 60
This distinction ensures courts aren't confined; they can proactively manage . In counterclaim scenarios, proper framing under is scrutinized, but improper reliefs may still face striking. 2014 0 Supreme(All) 2642
are strictly plaints or written statements per , extending to additional under , but applications like differ contextually. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 63882
Election Disputes: In a challenge to an election on bribery grounds, irrelevant averments about personal threats were struck as unnecessary and embarrassing, lacking linkage.
Proceedings: A defense was struck for persistent non-payment of maintenance, deemed process abuse. The court approved prior judgments affirming Section 151 and Order 6 Rule 16. 2017 0 Supreme(Ker) 490
Issues: Courts cannot strike merely on without fitting Rule 16 clauses (a)-(c). A reasoned order is mandatory; mixed law-fact issues require evidence.
Vijay N. VS Kavitha Kanaparthi
Party Deletion and Striking: In employment termination suits, conspiracy allegations against multiple defendants weren't struck if tied to reliefs, despite one defendant's liability undertaking. 2013 0 Supreme(Del) 2348
Relinquished Defenses: Once a party consents to proceed (e.g., waiving ), they can't later seek striking under Order 6 Rule 16 for the same . All pleas must be raised timely. 2013 0 Supreme(MP) 214
These cases show the power's nuanced, discretionary use.
Courts exercise this power sparingly:
Vijay N. VS Kavitha Kanaparthi
The power to strike out reliefs must be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. 2007 0 Supreme(J&K) 75
Parties should view this as case management tools, not weapons. Early applications prevent trial delays.
While primarily addresses pleading amendments, courts' under Section 151 enable striking off improper reliefs, ensuring focused litigation. Judicial precedents reinforce judicious use, preventing abuse while upholding rights. Understanding this empowers better strategy.
Stay informed on CPC evolutions for effective advocacy.
#Order6Rule16 #CPCIndia #StrikingPleadings
A conjoint reading of Order 6, Rule 16 of CPC, goes to show that only in three situation, the plaint pleadings can be struck off. ... In the first judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows: ... " .. .. .. 16. Order 6, Rule 16 CPC which empowers the court to strike out the pleadings reads thus: ... 16. Striking out pleadings. ... For better appreciation of the case, ....
No doubt, Order 6, Rule 17 relates only to the power of the Court to allow parties to alter and amend pleadings ; and the word "pleadings" means only plaints and written statements (See Order 6, Rule 1); and an application to sue as a pauper becomes a plaint and therefore a pleading only after it is ... granted (See Order 33, Rule 8). ... But it is further contended (a) that the Court has not got the power to direct the application ....
6 Rule 1 (applications in the course of proceedings).” ... 32 Rule 6, Order 42 Rule 13 and/or Order 92 Rule 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 1. ... Such further orders and/or reliefs as this Honourable Court deems fit and just. ... Where a breach is fundamentally defective it can be classified as a nullity” (iii)In HUP HIN SOON SDN BHD v CHONG KIN LIN & ANOR , held: “Striking off a w....
(sic) That the Defendant no. 1, by way of Counter Claim as provided Under Order VIII Rule 6(six) A CPC prays for the following reliefs. ... 1. ... Shri Bagwe, the learned Counsel did contend that even a counterclaim falling under Rule 6-A must be of the same nature as a set off falling under Rule 6. On a plain reading of the provisions of Rule 6-A, it is not possible to accept this contention of ....
The pleading is defined in Order 6 Rule 1 to mean the plaint and the written statement whereas the Rule 2 of Order 6 provides that the pleading shall contain a statement in a concise form on a material fact on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defence. ... ... In order to give effect to this contention it would have to be held that the words “either party” in Order 6 Rule 17 mean t....
Act and Order 6 Rule 16 and 07 Rule 17 of the C.P.C. For the sake of brevity, Section 83 is quoted herein below: Section 83 contents of petition :-"1. ... provisions of Order VI Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for striking out the paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 to 35 of the election petition on the ground that the paragraph 36 of the election petition, which stands captioned as 'Grounds'....
Now, Order 6 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure defines "pleadings". It means a plaint or written statement; but the word "pleads" has not been defined in this rule. ... which are not the plaintiff's goods as and for the plaintiff's goods and for other reliefs. ... Order accordingly. ... ... ( 6 ) IN these circumstances I hold that the present application is not premature. ... A plaintiff can always file a mixed action for infringement and "pass....
Now, Order 6 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure defines " pleadings ". It means a plaint or written statement; but the word " pleads " has not been denned in this rule. ... which are not the plaintiffs goods as and for the plaintiff's goods and for other reliefs. ... A plaintiff can always file a mixed action for infringement and "passing off". ... But the legislature does not give to the Court the power to slay a suit for "passing off". At the sa....
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Code of Civil Procedure 1977(1920 A.D) and its provisions, including Section 26, Order ... The plaintiffs have disclosed in the plaint the reliefs which they have claimed. Order 7 Rule 7 of the Code also provides that plaint shall state specifically the relief which the plaintiff claims. ... 8. Order 6 Rule 1 defines pleading. ... Order 6 Rule 17 of the Cod....
Pleadings shall mean plaint and written statement as per Order 6, rule 1 CPC. In that context, the pleadings and additional pleadings in Order 8, rule 9 include the additional plaint also which can be either called as rejoinder or the reply in its real consequences." ... e) Application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC cannot be treated as one under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC as both are contextually different. ....
The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any matter in any pleading- If there is no provision under Order 6 Rule 16 for striking off the pleadings where the Court can pass an order under Section 151 C.P.C. Order 6 Rule 16 of C.P.C reads as under: The above judgment came to be considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Jayasree v. Vivekanandan [2012 (2) KLT 249] and the judgment has been approved.
(b) Where such pleading tends to prejudice, embarrass or delay fair trial of the suit; or (a) Where such pleading is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious: or Bare reading of Rule 16 Order 6 makes it clear that the Court may order striking off pleadings in the following circumstances;
Bare reading of Rule 16 of Order 6 makes it clear that the court may order striking off pleadings in the following circumstances: (a) where such pleading is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious; or (b) where such pleading tends to prejudice, embarrass or delay fair trial of the suit; or
Before proceeding on the merits of this application, it is pertinent to give a brief description of the parties in this suit. 7 under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC seeking deletion of the names of defendants no. 1 to 4 and 6, as well as under Order VI Rule 16 for striking off pleadings made against these defendants.
Appellant opposed this application by filing a reply. This application has been allowed by the impugned order which has led to the present civil appeal. Order 6 rule 16 for striking off the pleadings in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the recrimination petition. In the meanwhile, respondent No.1 filed another application being I.A. No.7248 of 2012 on 1.11.2012 under
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
