AI Overview...
-
Plaint Statement Barred by Law - Several sources emphasize that under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), a plaint can be rejected if it appears from the statement therein that the suit is barred by any law, such as limitation or lack of cause of action. For example, sources SNOWHITE APPARELS LTD VS K. S. A. TECHNOPAK (I) LTD - Delhi, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur VS Miss Priya Soleman - Rajasthan, UNMUKT BHATNAGAR VS MANOJ BHATNAGAR - Delhi, Popat And Kotecha Property VS State Bank Of India Staff Association - Supreme Court, SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES, SMT CARMELINA GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay, Hanumappa VS Chikkannaiah - Karnataka, SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay, and K. Kumar VS Uma Rani - Madras consistently highlight that the plaint must be rejected if it clearly shows the suit is barred by law, especially limitation or absence of cause of action. SNOWHITE APPARELS LTD VS K. S. A. TECHNOPAK (I) LTD - Delhi, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur VS Miss Priya Soleman - Rajasthan, UNMUKT BHATNAGAR VS MANOJ BHATNAGAR - Delhi, and SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES, SMT CARMELINA GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay specify that the statement in the plaint should unequivocally demonstrate that the suit is barred, justifying rejection.
-
Legal Criteria for Rejection - The courts hold that if the plaint discloses no cause of action or the suit is barred by law, it is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d). For instance, UNMUKT BHATNAGAR VS MANOJ BHATNAGAR - Delhi and Popat And Kotecha Property VS State Bank Of India Staff Association - Supreme Court clarify that the entire plaint or the specific part that shows the suit is barred by law must be rejected, and partial rejection is not permissible if no cause of action is disclosed overall.
-
Exceptions and Court Discretion - Some sources, such as Hanumappa VS Chikkannaiah - Karnataka, note that courts should not reject a plaint based on extraneous considerations outside the statement in the plaint. The rejection must be based solely on the facts presented within the plaint that show the suit is barred.
-
Limitation and Cause of Action - Several references, including SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur VS Miss Priya Soleman - Rajasthan, and K. Kumar VS Uma Rani - Madras, underline that if the suit is time-barred or lacks a cause of action as per the plaint's statement, rejection is justified. Conversely, if the plaint does not clearly show the suit is barred, rejection is not warranted.
Analysis and Conclusion
A statement made in a plaint indicating that the suit is barred by law—such as limitation or absence of cause of action—is a valid ground for rejection under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC. The courts require that the statement in the plaint must clearly and unequivocally demonstrate that the suit is barred by law for rejection to be justified. Rejection based on such grounds is appropriate only when the plaint explicitly shows the suit's barred status; extraneous considerations or assumptions outside the plaint are not permissible. Therefore, any statement in the plaint that shows the suit is barred by law is liable to be rejected, ensuring procedural efficiency and adherence to legal standards.
References: - SNOWHITE APPARELS LTD VS K. S. A. TECHNOPAK (I) LTD - Delhi - Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur VS Miss Priya Soleman - Rajasthan - UNMUKT BHATNAGAR VS MANOJ BHATNAGAR - Delhi - Popat And Kotecha Property VS State Bank Of India Staff Association - Supreme Court - SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES, SMT CARMELINA GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay - Hanumappa VS Chikkannaiah - Karnataka - SHRI CAPISTRANO GOMES vs STATE OF GOA - Bombay - K. Kumar VS Uma Rani - Madras
Search Results for "Where any Statement Made in the Plaint Shows Barred by Law is Liable to be Rejected"
2005 0 Supreme(Del) 477 • India - Delhi
B.A.KHAN, ANIL KUMAR
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 7 rule 11 - Application for rejection of plaint on the ground that suit is barred by limitation ... rightly rejected by learned Civil Judge. ... the defendant disputed its liability - Held that the plaintiff cannot be non-suited at this stage - Application for rejection of plaint ... ... ( 7 ) A perusal of the Clause (d) shows that the plaint would be liable to be rejected if the statement #HL_STA....
1999 0 Supreme(Raj) 6 • India - Rajasthan
AMRESH KUMAR SINGH
C.P.C., Order 7, Rule 11(d) – Rejection of plaint – Where it appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law – Order ... shows that the suit is barred by any law in force. ... 7, Rule 11(d) applies to those cases only where the statement made by the plaintiff in the plaint, without any doubt or dispute ... The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the lower court h....
2006 0 Supreme(Del) 499 • India - Delhi
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
rejected. ... testator and plaintiff entitled to succeed only if the earlier legatee had pre-deceased Suit not showing any cause of action - Plaint ... " ... ( 13 ) A reading of the aforesaid provision shows that where there is no disclosure of cause of action or where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law, the plaint is liable to be rejected. ... is properly valued but the #HL_S....
2005 6 Supreme 7 • India - Supreme Court
ARIJIT PASAYAT, H.K.SEMA
(d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; ... (e) where it is not filed in duplicate; ... (f) where the plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of rule 9. ... Nachhattar Singh Gill (1982 (3) SCC 487), only a part of the plaint cannot be rejected and if no cause of action is disclosed, the plaint as a whole must be rejected. ... 18. In Raptakos Brett & Co. Ltd. v.
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 114 • India - High Court of Bombay
BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J
Plaint was rejected. ... ... ... Result: Revision allowed; plaint rejected. ... (A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order VII Rule 11 - Limitation Act, 1963 - Rejection of plaint - Plaint challenged as it was barred ... statement in the plaint to be barred by any law” 13. ... The plaint can be rejected on the ground of limitation only where the suit appears from ....
2008 0 Supreme(Kar) 529 • India - Karnataka
S.R.BANNURMATH, A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA
Therefore, the Trial Court is not justified in holding that the plaint is liable to be rejected as barred by law. ... The trial Court has considered matters which are outside the purview of the plaint to hold that the suit is barred by l aw. ... On facts, held, a reading of the plaint shows that, there is not real cause of action and what has been set out in the plaint is ... Therefore, the Trial Court is not justi....
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 23484 • India - Bombay High Court
BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J
... ... Result: Revision allowed; the plaint was rejected. ... of application for plaint rejection upheld due to lack of cause of action and limitation; the plaintiffs' suit was barred by limitation ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The suit was time-barred based on the cause of action first arising in 2002, therefore the plaint ... statement in the plaint to be barred by any law” 13. ... The plaint#....
2014 0 Supreme(Bom) 564 • India - Bombay
R.D.DHANUKA
of facts, liable to be rejected. - A perusal of the plaint indicates that the suit is for specific performance of the two documents ... It is also stated that no part of the plaint is barred by law of limitation. ... statement. ... The words used in Clause (d) of Rule 11 of C.P.C. are to the effect that the plaint can be rejected when suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be b....
2022 0 Supreme(Cal) 1339 • India - Calcutta
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
made in plaint at least do not disclose that suit is barred by limitation - Plaint discloses cause of action which shows plaintiff's ... , 1908 - Order VII Rule 11 (d), Section 151 - Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 18, Article 113 - Suit for recovery - Rejection of plaint ... about his right to sue - He has specifically averred in plaint that cause of action arose inter-alia with termination of contract ... As regards the claim of the petitioner that the suit is hopele....
2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 728 • India - Madras
M.GOVINDARAJ
Final Decision: The Civil Revision petition was allowed, and the order refusing to reject the plaint was set aside. ... The defendant argued that the suit was barred by limitation. ... Limitation - Civil Suit - Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C - Art.58, 59, 113 of Limitation Act, 1963 - Surreal cause of action and barred ... In terms of Order 7 Rule 11 (d) CPC, the Plaint shall be rejected where the suit appears from the statement in the Plaint to be barred#HL_E....
Filter by Legal Phrase
