Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Suit for Declaration and Cancellation of Gift Deed and Sale Deed — Order VII Rule 11 CPC Application Rejected as Plaint Discloses Cause of Action. The Court held that the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the defence may be strong.

  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arises from a suit filed by the respondent (plaintiff) before the Delhi High Court seeking declaration and cancellation of a gift deed dated 27.04.2010 and a sale deed dated 10.01.2011, along with mandatory and permanent injunctions. The suit was originally filed as CS(OS) No.809/2011. The plaintiff was permitted to abandon prayers (c) and (d) vide order dated 20.05.2015. The suit was later transferred to the District Court and renumbered as CS(OS) No.612960/2016. The appellants (defendant nos. 5 to 9) filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint. The trial court allowed the application vide order dated 01.07.2017, rejecting the plaint. The plaintiff filed a review petition which was dismissed on 02.03.2019. The plaintiff then filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Section 115 CPC before the High Court, which set aside the trial court's orders and restored the suit. The Supreme Court considered whether the plaint disclosed a cause of action and whether it was barred by Order II Rule 2 CPC. The Court held that the plaint averments disclosed a cause of action and that the bar under Order II Rule 2 CPC did not apply as the cause of action in the earlier suit was different. The Court also held that the trial court had partially rejected the plaint, which is impermissible. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's order.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Rejection of Plaint - Cause of Action - The plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the defence may be strong. The court must look at the plaint averments alone and not the defence. (Paras 1-30)

B) Civil Procedure - Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Partial Rejection of Plaint - The rejection of plaint must be of the entire plaint and not a part thereof, unless the part is severable. (Paras 1-30)

C) Civil Procedure - Order II Rule 2 CPC - Bar on Subsequent Suit - The bar under Order II Rule 2 CPC applies only if the cause of action is the same and the plaintiff omitted to sue for a part of the claim. (Paras 1-30)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for lack of cause of action or being barred by law, and whether the High Court erred in setting aside the trial court's orders rejecting the plaint.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's order setting aside the trial court's orders and restoring the suit.

Law Points

  • Order VII Rule 11 CPC
  • cause of action
  • plaint rejection
  • partial rejection of plaint
  • Order II Rule 2 CPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 INSC 657

Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@ SLP (C) No.5812 of 2020)

2023-01-01

C.T. Ravikumar

2023 INSC 657

B.P. Naagar & Ors.

Raj Pal Sharma

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for declaration and cancellation of gift deed and sale deed, and for mandatory and permanent injunction.

Remedy Sought

The plaintiff sought declaration and cancellation of gift deed dated 27.04.2010 and sale deed dated 10.01.2011, and mandatory and permanent injunction.

Filing Reason

The plaintiff alleged that the gift deed and sale deed were void or voidable.

Previous Decisions

The trial court allowed the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and rejected the plaint on 01.07.2017, which was upheld on review on 02.03.2019. The High Court set aside those orders on 02.12.2019.

Issues

Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action? Whether the plaint is barred by Order II Rule 2 CPC? Whether the trial court could partially reject the plaint?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action and is barred by Order II Rule 2 CPC. Respondent argued that the plaint discloses a cause of action and the earlier suit was for different relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the defence may be strong. The court must look at the plaint averments alone. Partial rejection of plaint is impermissible unless the part is severable. The bar under Order II Rule 2 CPC applies only if the cause of action is the same and the plaintiff omitted to sue for a part of the claim.

Judgment Excerpts

The plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the defence may be strong. The rejection of plaint must be of the entire plaint and not a part thereof, unless the part is severable.

Procedural History

The suit was originally filed before the Delhi High Court as CS(OS) No.809/2011. The plaintiff was permitted to abandon certain prayers on 20.05.2015. The suit was transferred to the District Court and renumbered as CS(OS) No.612960/2016. The trial court allowed the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on 01.07.2017, rejecting the plaint. The review petition was dismissed on 02.03.2019. The High Court set aside those orders on 02.12.2019. The Supreme Court granted leave and dismissed the appeal on 2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order VII Rule 11, Order II Rule 2, Section 115
  • Constitution of India: Article 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Suit for Declaration and Cancellation of Gift Deed and Sale Deed — Order VII Rule 11 CPC Application Rejected as Plaint Discloses Cause of Action. The Court held that the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision: BOT Scheme Agreements Classified as Leases, Rejects Claims of Legitimate Expectation and Promissory Estoppel. In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court affirms that Build, Operate & Transfer (BOT) agreements f...