Para-wise reply to a plaint is essential, Allegations deemed to be admitted unless specifically denied

In the matter of Thangam & Anr versus Navamani Ammal Civil Appeal No. 8935 of 2011 decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 04.03.2024

FACTS: The issue pertained to the genuineness of a Will dated 09.10.1984. A suit was filed by the Respondent/plaintiff which was decreed by the Trial Court holding the Will as genuine. The Appellants/defendants appealed against the decree wherein the decree was reversed. In second appeal, the decree of the first Appellate Court was set aside, and the Trial Court decree was restored. The second appeal was challenged before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE: The Hon’ble Supreme Court before deciding the Appeal noted that the written statement filed by the Appellants/defendants did not contain para wise reply and no specific denial to the claim of the Respondent. Therefore, the contents of the plaint were deemed admitted.

OBSERVATIONS:  The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India perused the plaint and observed that the plaint consisted of ten paragraphs. The Written statement filed by the Appellants/defendants did not contain any specific para wise reply.

The Court observed that in the absence of a para-wise reply to the plaint, the Court must inquire as to which lines in which paragraphs are admitted or denied in the written statement. Order 8 Rule 3 and Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter CPC) clearly provides for a specific denial or admission against the pleadings made in the plaint. Further it states that general or evasive denial is not sufficient. The Court observed that a defendant can take preliminary objections as separate paragraphs which can be easily responded by the plaintiff, which will enable the Court to properly comprehend the pleadings of the party instead of delving into every paragraph.

The Court relied upon Badat & Co. vs East India Trading Co. AIR 1964 SC 538 where the Court discussed specific admission and denial of pleadings. The Court held that Order 7 and Order 8 of CPC is an integrated code where the written statement must deal with each allegation of the plaint and a defendant must not deny a fact evasively but answer point to substance. The Court further relied on Lohia Properties (P) Ltd., Tinsukia Vs. Atmaram Kumar (1993) 4 SCC 6, wherein the Court held that a defendant must deal specifically with each, and every allegation made in the plaint which as per the defendant is not true as per the Order 8 Rule 3 of CPC. The Supreme Court observed that ensuring that the principles of specific and para denials and admission are properly followed can help the Courts streamline the working of judiciary. The Court accordingly dismissed the Appeal finding it without any merit.

DJ-06-2024