AI Overview...

Order 6 Rule 16 - Striking Out Pleadings: This rule grants courts the authority to strike out parts of pleadings that are scandalous, vexatious, frivolous, or unnecessary, ensuring the proceedings are focused on relevant issues. The power is extraordinary and must be exercised with caution. Courts may also strike out pleadings that contain irrelevant or scandalous allegations, or where the pleadings are embarrassing or contain inadmissible evidence Vijay N. VS Kavitha Kanaparthi - Current Civil Cases, Gopiram Tailor VS Om Shanker - Rajasthan, MEERA ASTHANA VS RAJENDRANATH ASTHANA - Madhya Pradesh, SUMITHRAN vs NEELAKANTAN - Kerala, Siddhartha Ray vs Narinder Kumar - Himachal Pradesh, SK. ILLIAS VS CO-OPERATIVE FOR AMERICAN RELIEF Everywhere, INDIA - Orissa, The Nedungadi Bank, Ltd. VS The Official Assignee Of Madras - Madras, Anderson Kirkwood Tennent VS Walter Mitchel - Calcutta, JAYAN vs SUJA Advocate - P K SAJEEV ,P K SAJEEV - Kerala, Lakshmamma, W/o. Late Chowdappa, D/o. Late Sanjeevappa VS A. Shamanna, S/o. Late Anjinappa - Karnataka.
Scope and Application: The rule can be invoked to delete evidence, scandalous or vexatious matter, or irrelevant allegations from pleadings. It is applicable in various contexts, including family disputes, insolvency cases, and civil suits, to streamline proceedings and eliminate improper material Gopiram Tailor VS Om Shanker - Rajasthan, SUMITHRAN vs NEELAKANTAN - Kerala, JAYAN vs SUJA Advocate - P K SAJEEV ,P K SAJEEV - Kerala.
Legal Principles: The power to strike out pleadings is an extraordinary remedy that must be exercised judiciously. Courts emphasize that such power is not to be used lightly but only when pleadings are clearly scandalous, vexatious, or an abuse of process. The courts also recognize that pleadings should be clear, relevant, and not contain scandalous or irrelevant allegations Siddhartha Ray vs Narinder Kumar - Himachal Pradesh.
Procedural Aspects: The rule allows for the removal of scandalous or vexatious material before trial, thus preventing unnecessary delays and focusing the trial on substantive issues. Courts have set precedents where pleadings were struck out for containing scandalous allegations against non-parties or irrelevant evidence SK. ILLIAS VS CO-OPERATIVE FOR AMERICAN RELIEF Everywhere, INDIA - Orissa.
Limitations: The exercise of this power is limited; courts must carefully consider whether the material is truly scandalous, vexatious, or irrelevant. The power is not to be used to dismiss entire cases but to remove improper parts of pleadings Siddhartha Ray vs Narinder Kumar - Himachal Pradesh.

Analysis and Conclusion:
Order 6 Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Code provides a crucial mechanism for courts to maintain the integrity of pleadings by striking out scandalous, vexatious, or irrelevant material. While it is an extraordinary power that must be exercised with caution, it is essential for preventing abuse of process and ensuring proceedings remain focused on substantive issues. Proper application of this rule helps streamline trials and uphold procedural discipline Vijay N. VS Kavitha Kanaparthi - Current Civil Cases, Gopiram Tailor VS Om Shanker - Rajasthan, MEERA ASTHANA VS RAJENDRANATH ASTHANA - Madhya Pradesh, SUMITHRAN vs NEELAKANTAN - Kerala, Siddhartha Ray vs Narinder Kumar - Himachal Pradesh.

Search Results for "Order 6 Rule 16 Strick out of Pleadings"

• India - Current Civil Cases

A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA

(i) Civil Procedure Code 1908—Section 11 Read with Order 6, Rule 16—Striking off Pleadings—Power can be exercised by the court on ... the said issue was covered under said clauses of Order 6 Rule 16—Order of the trial court set aside. ... 16 of Order 6 is attracte....

2000 0 Supreme(Raj) 225 • India - Rajasthan

ARUN MADAN

evidence, should be struck off and deleted from the plaint under Order 6, Rule 16, CPC. ... family settlement - eviction suit - Order 6, Rule 16, CPC - [Order 6, Rule 16, CPC] - The court discussed the admissibility of ... The defendant sought deletion of certain ....

1993 0 Supreme(MP) 359 • India - Madhya Pradesh

R.C.LAHOTI

Order 6, Rule 16, C. P. ... Whether the unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious matter in the plaint can be struck out under Order 6, Rule 16, C. ... 6, Rule 16, C. ... 6, Rule 16, C. ... 6, R....

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 7886 • India - High Court of Kerala

A. BADHARUDEEN, J

Striking Out - Pleadings - Code of Civil Procedure - Order 6 Rule 16 - The court emphasized that pleadings can be struck out if ... Issues: The main legal issue was whether the court could strike down pleadings under Order 6 Rule 16 of the Code of Civil ... Finding of the Court: ....

2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 8142 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

(A) Civil Procedure Code, Order 6 Rule 16 - Indian Evidence Act, Sections 17 and 58 - Striking out of pleadings - The petitioner ... sought to strike pleadings claiming they were scandalous and vexatious - The court held the power to strike out pleadings is extraordinary ... and must be exercised with care - The allegations made in the pleadings were f....

SK. ILLIAS VS CO-OPERATIVE FOR AMERICAN RELIEF Everywhere, INDIA

2006 0 Supreme(Ori) 564 • India - Orissa

L.MOHAPATRA

Order 6, Rule 16 - Allegations against Non-Party Officers - C. P. C. - [Order 6, Rule 16 of the C. P. ... 6, Rule 16 of the C. ... C.] - The court considered the application filed under Order 6, Rule 16 of the C. P. ... #HL_STAR....

The Nedungadi Bank, Ltd. VS The Official Assignee Of Madras

1929 0 Supreme(Mad) 516 • India - Madras

REILLY

Official Assignee - Insolvency - Civil Procedure Code, Order 6 Rule 5, Order 6 Rule 16, Order 11 Rule 21 - The court discussed ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the power to strike out a defense exists under Rule 16 of Order 6 and that failing to ... of #H....

Anderson Kirkwood Tennent VS Walter Mitchel

1925 0 Supreme(Cal) 215 • India - Calcutta

SANDERSON, RANKIN

The Court directed the Defendant's written statement to be struck out as embarrassing under Order 6, Rule 16. ... 6, Rule 16, and the validity of the counter-claim. ... verbal arrangement - Court's exercise of jurisdiction under Order 6, Rule 16 Fact of the Case: The Plaintiff sou....

JAYAN vs SUJA Advocate - P K SAJEEV ,P K SAJEEV

2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17165 • India - High Court of Kerala

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ

Civil - Family Court - C.P.C Section 151, Order 6 Rule 16 - Summary of the court's application of inherent powers to strike off ... 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 ... It is apparent from Order #HL_STAR....

Lakshmamma, W/o. Late Chowdappa, D/o. Late Sanjeevappa VS A. Shamanna, S/o. Late Anjinappa

2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 100 • India - Karnataka

SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

6 Rule 16 of CPC(Para 5). ... Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 6 Rule 16 - Order 1 Rule 10 - Suit is for partition - Writ Petition challenging ... Point of Law: Order 6 Rule 16 of CPC empowers the court to strike out any part of the ... 6 #HL....

Filter by Legal Phrase

Legal Issues on Supreme Today AI

Approbate and Reprobate: Key Legal Doctrine Explained Vague Threatening Phone Calls: Why They Fail in Court Does SCC Own Copyright on Full Text Judgments? G.O. Ms No. 108: TN Salesman & Packer Recruitment Rules Article 226 vs 227: Key Differences in High Court Powers Judgments on One-Time GNA Charges in India TIP: Judicial vs Executive Magistrate Rules Explained Can a Sole Dissenting Member Block Society Redevelopment? How to Sue Fake Facebook Accounts for Defamation in India Illustrations: Person Dominating Will in Indian Law Perusal in Court Orders: What It Means in Law Litigant Vigilance: Essential Duty in Court Proceedings What to Do If Company Suit Signatory Dies Renting House Without Rent Agreement in India: Risks Stay on Money Realization After Ejectment: Is It Possible?