PLAINT AND WRITTEN STATEMENT UNDER CPC

Advertisements

Spread the love

Post Views: 1,668

This article is written by Adarsh Anand Amola of 7^th Trimester of IIM Rohtak, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

Abstract

This article explores two essential components of civil litigation – the “Plaint” and the “Written Statement.” The “Plaint” is the initial statement of claim that initiates a lawsuit, encompassing various legal requirements. In contrast, the “Written Statement” is the defendant’s response to the plaintiff’s allegations, subject to specific time limits and judicial discretion. The article discusses the key aspects and procedures associated with these legal elements, emphasizing their significance in the civil litigation process.

Keywords: Plaint, Order VII, Written Statement, Order VIII

Introduction

In the intricate realm of civil litigation, two fundamental components play a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of legal battles: the “Plaint” and the “Written Statement.” These documents, although not explicitly defined in the legal code, are the foundational keystones that give structure to the labyrinth of lawsuits. The “Plaint” can be understood as the clarion call that heralds the commencement of a legal dispute, while the “Written Statement” forms the barricade or bridge against which the defendant launches their defense.

The “Plaint,” akin to a musical score for a legal symphony, is the formal statement of claim through which a plaintiff initiates their legal journey. It articulates the essence of the case, detailing the cause of action and the relief sought. While the Indian Code of Civil Procedure does not explicitly define this term, it dedicates Order VII to establish the essential guidelines for crafting a plaint. Within this framework, Rules 1-8 of Order VII meticulously outline the specific elements that must be woven into the fabric of a plaint.

The components specified in Rule 1 of Order VII act as the warp and weft of this legal tapestry, encompassing particulars such as the court’s name, the parties’ identities, the cause of action, and the court’s jurisdiction, among others. These particulars, like the brushstrokes of a masterful painting, come together to create a vivid portrait of the plaintiff’s claims and desires.

Plaint

In essence, a “plaint” is a written statement detailing the cause of action and the relief sought, or it can be seen as the document used to commence a lawsuit. Therefore, a plaint, as defined by these rules, encompasses all the necessary components to frame the cause of action and the relief being sought by the party presenting it. Ultimately, a plaint represents the party’s expression of their cause of action and the relief they are seeking.

Rule 1 of Order VII mandates specific particulars to be included in a plaint. These details encompass the name of the court where the case will be heard (as in ‘Civil Judge Junior Division’), the plaintiff’s name, description, and place of residence, the same information for the defendant, the acknowledgment of a party being a minor if applicable, a clear exposition of the cause of action, a demonstration that the court has jurisdiction, and a statement of the relief sought by the plaintiff, either plainly or as an alternative. If the plaintiff has permitted a set-off or relinquished a portion of their claim, the amount forsaken should be specified. The suit’s valuation must be indicated, and in cases involving the recovery of money, the exact sum claimed should be clearly stated. For suits concerning immovable property, a comprehensive property description sufficient for identification is necessary. Finally, if the plaintiff is acting in a representative capacity, it is essential to demonstrate a real, existing interest in the subject matter and the steps taken to enable the filing of such a suit. In situations where a specific monetary amount is sought, precision is required rather than vague approximations, but in cases involving mesne profits, unsettled accounts, or movable assets with uncertain values, approximations can be made in the complaint. The complaint must demonstrate that the defendant has an interest in the subject matter and is liable to respond to the plaintiff’s claims.^[1]

Rule 6: Ground of exemption from limitation law

If the complaint is filed after the expiration of the statute of limitations, it must also specify the grounds on which the plaintiff seeks an exemption, if applicable. The court may grant an exemption based on these grounds, but it also has the discretion to grant exemptions not mentioned in the complaint, as long as they do not contradict the grounds in the complaint.^[2]

Rule 9: Procedure on admitting Plaint

If the court issues summons to the defendant, the plaintiff is directed to provide as many copies of the complaint as there are defendants within seven days of the summons order. The plaintiff must also pay the necessary fees for issuing these summonses. Rule 11(f) further states that non-compliance with the provisions of Rule 9 can result in the rejection of the complaint.^[3]

Rule 10: Return of Plaint-

Order VII Rule 10-10 B deals with the process of returning the complaint. According to Rule 10, if, at any point during the lawsuit, the court determines it lacks jurisdiction in terms of territory, pecuniary matters, or subject matter, it must return the complaint to be filed in the appropriate court where the suit should have been initiated. The court will inform the plaintiff of this decision before returning the complaint, especially when the defendant has appeared. The court of Appeal or Revision also has the authority to return the complaint under this rule after overturning the decree. The judge, when returning the complaint, will endorse the date of presentation and return, the party presenting it, and provide a brief explanation for the return.^[4]

The endorsement under Sub-Rule 2 is subject to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963,^[5] which means that if the plaintiff genuinely pursued the case in the wrong court, that period is excluded from the statute of limitations.

In ONGC v. Modern Construction Co.^[6], the Supreme Court held that when a plaint is filed in the proper court after getting returned from the wrong court, it cannot be said to be said to be a continuation of the suit. The suit must deem to commence when the plaint is filed in the proper court.

If the complaint fails to disclose a cause of action, the court will reject it. The court must determine that even if the allegations in the complaint are proven, the plaintiff would not be entitled to relief. The Supreme Court, in the case of Roop Lal Sathi v. Nachhattter Singh Gill^[7], AIR 1982 SC 1559, established that only part of the complaint cannot be rejected; if no cause of action is disclosed, the entire complaint should be rejected.

The non-service of notice under Section 80 of the CPC^[8] may be one such defect. The Supreme Court, in the case of Mayar H.K. Ltd. v. Owner and Parties, Vessel M.V. Fortune Express^[9], established that the grounds for rejecting a complaint as specified in Rule 11 are not exhaustive. The court can reject a complaint on other relevant grounds as well. If a complaint is deemed vexatious, meritless, or does not clearly establish a right to sue, it may be rejected by the court.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Madhav Prasad Aggarwal v. Axis Bank^[10], established that a complaint can be either wholly accepted or wholly rejected. It is not permissible to reject a complaint only in part or against certain defendants while continuing it against others.

In R.K. Roja v. U.S. Rayadu & Anr.^[11], the Supreme Court held that “The application under Order VII Rule 11 may be filed at any stage, but once the application is filed, the court must dispose of it before proceeding with the trial.”

WRITTEN STATEMENT

Who may file written statement?

Written statement is filed by the defendant or his duly authorized agent. If there are several defendants a common written statement can be filed by them. In such case it must be signed by all of them. As far as verification is concerned, it can be verified by any one defendant.

Time limit for filing written statement:

Order VIII pertains to the rules related to the written statement.^[12] The term “written statement” is not explicitly defined in the Code, but it refers to the defendant’s response to the facts alleged in the plaintiff’s complaint. In the written statement, the defendant can address the facts presented in the complaint, introduce new facts, and assert counterclaims or set-offs. All the general rules of pleading as outlined in Order VI also apply to the written statement.

The written statement is submitted by the defendant or their authorized representative. In cases with multiple defendants, they can collectively submit a common written statement, provided that it is signed by all of them. Verification of the written statement can be done by any one of the defendants.

According to Order VIII Rule 1, the defendant must file a written statement within 30 days from the date of receiving the summons. The proviso to Order VIII Rule 1^[13], added through an amendment in 2002, states that if the defendant fails to submit a written statement within 30 days of receiving the summons, the outer time limit for filing the written statement is 90 days from the date of service of the summons.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Kailash v. Nankhu^[14], ruled that the 90-day time limit for filing the written statement is not mandatory. Even though the provision is phrased in a negative manner, it is considered to be directory and permissive rather than mandatory or imperative. This interpretation allows the process of justice to be expedited while still upholding the fundamental principles of fairness, which are essential to the administration of justice.

Additionally, in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India^[15], the court confirmed that there is judicial discretion to permit the defendant to file a written statement even after the expiration of 90 days. Order VIII does not impose a strict restriction on extending or granting further time beyond the 90-day limit. However, this discretion should be exercised in exceptional circumstances, and routine orders for extension should not be granted.

The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division, and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015^[16] introduced special provisions for commercial disputes, along with amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure. It added a second proviso to Order VIII Rule 1, which allows the defendant in a commercial dispute of a specific value to file a written statement within 120 days from the date of service of summons. If the defendant still fails to file the written statement within this extended period, they forfeit the right to do so, and the court will not accept the written statement.

Rule 1A: Duty of defendant to produce documents upon which relief is claimed or relied upon by him-

Under Order VIII, rule 1A sets requirements for the defendant to produce documents supporting their defense along with the written statement. If the defendant possesses such documents, they must provide them and list the documents specifically in the case file. Failure to do so may result in the defendant being unable to present these documents as evidence unless the court allows it. This rule does not apply to documents used for cross-examining the plaintiff’s witnesses or refreshing the memory of witnesses.

A general rule of pleading is that all material facts must be included in the pleadings. The defendant must state all matters demonstrating that the suit is not valid, that the transaction is either void or voidable in point of law, or that there are facts indicating illegality and other grounds of defense.

Rule 5: Specific denial-

Rule 5 establishes situations where the law presumes an admission. These include when the defendant neither specifically denies a fact nor admits it in their written statement. In essence, every fact in the complaint that is not specifically denied is presumed to be admitted by the defendant. However, this rule does not apply when a person is under a disability. The rule also allows the court, at its discretion, to require any fact to be proven, as one cannot both admit and deny the same fact. Section 31 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872^[17], states that admissions are not conclusive proof but can create an estoppel.

In the case of Badat & Co. v. East India Trading Co.^[18], the Supreme Court held that when combined, Rules 3, 4, and 5 mean that every allegation in the complaint must be contested. The written statement should address the substantive points, and if a denial is evasive, the fact will be treated as admitted.

Regarding deemed admissions, Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872^[19], states that facts admitted by any rule of pleading are deemed to be admitted. However, the proviso to this section allows the court, at its discretion, to require the fact to be proven in other circumstances.

In the case of Balraj Taneja v. Sunil Madan^[20], the Supreme Court emphasized that courts should exercise caution regarding admissions made in the written statement. Courts should not rush to pass judgment simply because a written statement was not submitted. Instead, they should consider whether, even if the facts in the complaint are admitted, a judgment could be rendered in favor of the plaintiff without requiring further proof. If there are disputed factual questions in the complaint that present two different versions, the court should require the plaintiff to prove the case. In such cases, the court can utilize the discretion provided in Order VIII Rule 5(2) and Order VIII Rule 10 to determine whether additional proof is necessary.

Conclusion

The “Plaint” serves as the formal initiation of a lawsuit, encompassing all the necessary components to frame the cause of action and relief sought. The “Written Statement” is the defendant’s response, subject to specific time limits and judicial discretion, and it plays a crucial role in admitting or contesting facts presented in the plaintiff’s complaint. Understanding the requirements and procedures associated with these legal elements is essential in the civil litigation process.

^[1] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VII Rule 5 No. 5, Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).

^[2] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VII Rule 6 No. 5, Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).

^[3] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VII Rule 9 No. 5, Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).

^[4] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VII Rule 10 No. 5, Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).

^[5] The Limitation Act, 1963, No. 36, § 14 Acts of Parliament, 1963 (India).

^[6] ONGC v. Modern Construction Co. (2014) 1 SCC 648

^[7] Roop Lal Sathi v. Nachhattter Singh Gill, AIR 1982 SC 1559

^[8] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, , No. 5, § 80 Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).

^[9] Mayar H.K. Ltd. v. Owner and Parties, Vessel M.V. Fortune Express Appeal (civil) 867 of 2006

^[10] Madhav Prasad Aggarwal v. Axis Bank, (2019) 7 SCC 158

^[11] R.K. Roja v. U.S. Rayadu & Anr. (2016) 14 SCC 275

^[12] supra note 1, at 1