While exercising the power under Order 7 Rule 11, the Court has to read averments in the plaint as a whole to find out whether it discloses a cause of action or whether the suit is barred under any law. At this stage the stand taken by the opposite party in the written statement or in the application for rejection of the plaint is wholly immaterial.
The Supreme Court in its recent decision has held that rejection of the plaint under Order VII rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is a drastic power conferred in the court to terminate a civil action at the threshold. The conditions precedent to the exercise of power under Order VII rule 11, are stringent.
While exercising the above power, the Court has to read averments in the plaint as a whole to find out whether it discloses a cause of action or whether the suit is barred under any law. At this stage the stand taken by the opposite party i.e. the defendants in the written statement or in the application for rejection of the plaint is wholly immaterial. It is only if the averment in the plaint does not disclose a cause of action or suit appears to be barred under any law the plaint can be rejected, otherwise, the claims would have to be adjudicated in the course of the trial.
[P.V. Guru Raj Reddy & Anr. vs. P. Neeradha Reddy & Ors.]
(SC, 13.02.2015)
(Civil Appeal No. 5254 of 2006)]