© Prof.

Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School

All rights reserved

Rules on Pleadings
Orders VI, VII, VIII
Order VI – Pleadings Generally
Key Concepts:

 Principles of Pleadings
 Amendment of Pleadings

Principles of Pleadings:

Meaning of Pleadings:

 Pleading means plaint or written statement- Rule 1.

 A pleading sets out the case for a party.

Object of Pleadings:

 Reasonable opportunity to the other side to respond.

 Because whenever a party files anything, a copy of the same is given to the other
side to respond.
 It helps to bring the parties to definite issues and to avoid surprise element.

Basic Rules of Pleadings:

 Should contain material facts briefly
(SC has defined material facts- all primary facts which must be proved at the trial by a party
to establish the existence of a cause of action or his defence are material facts)
Material facts:

 Basic facts which must be pleaded by the party.

 Purpose is to give a chance to the other side to know the case that he has to defend.
 In the absence of the pleading, a party cannot lead evidence.
 Non mention of a material fact leads to non-pleading and no cause of action arises in
favour of such party.

Particulars:

 Details of the case.

 They amplify, refine, and embellish material facts.
 Should NOT contain evidence

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

The following case illustrates that evidence of facts, as distinguished from the facts
themselves, need not be mentioned in the pleading.

Borrodaile v. Hunter (1845)5 M&G 639 (Principles of pleadings)

Facts: A was insured with an insurance company. One of the terms of the policy was that
the policy would be void if the insured committed suicide. A actually committed suicide by
shooting himself with a pistol. Thereupon, an action was brought against the company on
the policy.

Judgment: It was held that the company should only plead that A had committed suicide
and therefore, the policy became void because this is the ‘material fact’. Other facts like- A
was melancholy for weeks, that he bought a pistol a day before his death, shot himself with
the said pistol and that a letter was found with him addressed to his wife stating that he
intended to kill himself are all evidences by means of which the material fact is to be
proved, and hence, not required to be stated in the pleading. Thus, a pleading should
contain a statement of material facts on which the party relies but not the evidence by
which those facts are to be proved.

 Should NOT contain law- it is for the court to decide

 Signing and Verification:
 Pleadings to be signed by the party or any person authorized by him and his
pleader.
 Rule 15- Every pleading shall be verified and the person verifying shall specify by
reference to the numbered paragraphs of the pleading
a. what he verifies of his own knowledge and
b. what he verifies upon information received and believed to be true.
 Date and place at which it was signed.
 The person verifying the pleading shall furnish an affidavit.
Amendment of Pleadings – Rule 17 (Effective from 1st July 2002)
The court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his
pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments, shall
be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in
controversy between the parties.
Proviso: No application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced,
unless the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not
have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.
Cardinal Principles:
Object: Courts empowered to grant amendment of pleadings in the larger interest of doing
full and complete justice to parties.
Discretion of Court:
*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students
enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

 By whom? - Any Party

 By when? - before commencement of trial
 Where? - where it is necessary for determination of real questions in controversy
 What kind of order?
 Non-appealable order
 Revision or Writ Petition
Questions to be asked:
 Whether the amendment is necessary for the determination of the real question in
controversy?
 Is the amendment sought with bonafide intentions?
 Whether the amendment alters the original COA or substitutes the original COA?
(Undue influence or Fraud)
 Whether the proposed amendment is inconsistent/ contradictory with the original
pleading?
Examples of when an amendment is granted
 To take note of subsequent events.
 To avoid multiplicity of proceedings
 To add a consequential relief
Examples of when amendment not granted
 Inconsistent plea
 Alters the COA
Scheme:
 Either the Plaintiff/Defendant applies for amendment
 Trial Court issues notice to the other side.
 Court hears both the parties on whether the amendment should be allowed.
 Passes a reasoned order.
 If aggrieved, then such party may prefer a revision before the HC or file a W.P.
Case Laws:
B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Paremswaran, (2000) 1 SCC 712 (Amendment of Pleadings)

Facts: Plaintiff filed a suit for eviction of the defendant alleging that he was a licensee.
Defendant, in his WS, contended that he was a lessee than a mere licensee. After the trial
had begun, defendant applied for amendment to his WS in order to add an alternative plea
that in case he is found to be a licensee, he is not liable to be evicted because his license is
irrevocable.

Issue: Whether such amendment should be allowed?

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

Judgment: The amendment sought is nor inconsistent to the pleas already raised neither a
withdrawal of any admission made in favor of the other side. Merely because the
amendment is filed after a prolonged delay is no ground to reject it particularly when it
does not cause such prejudice to the other side which cannot be compensated by costs. The
amendment is necessary for determining the real controversies in the suit, and hence,
allowed.

Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal v. KK Modi, (2006) 4 SCC 385 (Amendment of Pleadings)

Facts: An Officers’ Welfare Trust formed for the general benefit of the employees of a
Company purchased 58000 equity shares of Godfrey Philips (GPI) which were held in the
name of the Trustee who had opened a separate bank account in his own name and not in
the name of the Trust. Any share certificates issued by GPI were not being received by the
beneficiaries nor any bonus shares were forwarded to them.

Procedural History: Not being able to derive any benefit from the Trust, beneficiaries filed
a suit for declaration, and permanent and mandatory injunction against the Trustee. Later,
they sought to amend their plaint to incorporate the relief of directing the defendants to
sell the shares of GPI held by the Trust and use the sale proceeds for the benefit of the
beneficiary-employees.

Issue: Whether such amendment should be allowed?

Judgment: The first part of Order 6 Rule 17 is discretionary which leaves it to the court to
allow amendment of pleading at any stage of the suit. The second part, however, is
imperative and enjoins the court to allow all such amendments which are necessary for
determining the real questions in controversy between the parties (here, for the interest of
the beneficiaries of the Trust as the Trustee was in exclusive possession of the shares of GPI
and on the dividends and was still exercising voting rights). Here, the proposed
amendment does not change the nature of the suit and there is no inconsistency with the
relief claimed in original plaint. Considering these reasons, and without going into the
merits of the case in amendment, it was held that if the same relief can be prayed for in the
new suit, it can also be incorporated in the pending suit.

Order VII – Plaint

Key Concepts:

 Contents of Plaint
 Return of Plaint
 Rejection of Plaint

Contents of Plaint:

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

 Rule 1: Particulars to be contained in Plaint.

(Court/ Parties/ COA and when it arose/ jurisdiction/ reliefs/ valuation for the
purposes of court fees)
 Rule 3: Where the subject matter of the suit is immovable property - Needs to
contain the description of the property.
 Rule 6: Limitation - when suit is brought after the expiration of the limitation
period.
 Rules 7 and 8: Reliefs -
 Declaration
 Monetary Reliefs
 Specific Performance
 Costs
 Interim orders like Temporary Injunction
 Equitable relief- Any other order in the interest of justice, equity and good
conscience which this Court may deem fit
Return of Plaint: Rule 10
 When?
At any stage of the proceedings, a plaint may be returned.
 Under what circumstances?
Lack of PJ/TJ/Sub-matter jurisdiction.
 Which Court?
It is returned by the court in which the said Plaint is filed.
Procedure
10 A - the trial court follows the procedure
10 B - when the appellate court confirms the return order and follows the procedure for
return.
Important Points:
 The judge returning the plaint should make endorsements regarding
i. date of presentation;
ii. Date of return;
iii. Name of the party presenting it; and
iv. Reasons for returning it.
 Either party may make an application for such RETURN
 Order of returning the plaint is APPEALABLE
*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students
enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

Rejection of Plaint: Rule 11

 When COA not disclosed.
(A says he has been defamed without stating that the statement made was false, published
and has lowered his reputation)
 Relief is undervalued
 Stamp paper
 Suit barred by any law
 Not filed in duplicate
 RULE 9 not complied with
Factors to consider while rejecting the plaint
1. Court does not go into the merits.
2. Prima facie opinion
3. Order given under 7/11 is a deemed decree and is appealable.
4. Does not operate as a bar of res judicata (dismissal in default).
Case Laws:
T Arivandanam v. T.V. Satyapal (1977) 4 SCC467 (Rejection of Plaint based on
frivolous litigation)
Facts & Procedural History: The petitioner who contested an eviction proceeding against
him, lost it, appealed against it, lost it again, moved a revision which was rejected by the
High Court. He was granted a 6 months time to vacate the premises. After this, he filed an
application praying for further time to vacate. Pending that proceeding, he filed a fresh suit
for declaration that the order of eviction has been obtained by fraud and collusion and
sought an injunction against the execution of that eviction order. The High Court granted
another 5 months time to vacate the premises on the basis that the suit for injunction
would be withdrawn by the petitioner. After withdrawing that, he filed another suit for ex
parte injunction which was not granted, and the appeal went unsuccessful. The petitioner
then came to the High Court in revision which was dismissed on merits. The petitioner
undauntedly applied for an SLP.
Issue: Whether the plaint is vexatious and meritless and ought to be rejected under Order
7 Rule 11?
Judgment: If on a meaningful and informal reading of a plaint, it is manifestly meritless in
the sense of not disclosing a clear right to sue, it ought to be rejected under Order 7 Rule
11. Here, the court was satisfied that the callous petitioner had been indulging in a series of
legal proceedings to evade an eviction order passed against him and hence his plaint was
inspired by vexatious motives and altogether groundless.
P.V. Gururaj Reddy v. P. Neeradha Reddy (2015)8 SCC 331 (Rejection of Plaint for
non-disclosure of cause of action)

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

Facts: Plaintiffs residing abroad reposed trust in their relatives in India and made funds
available to them to purchase two immovable properties in India in the name of plaintiffs.
Later on, they came to know that without their knowledge, the sale deed of first property
was executed in the name of one of the defendants, and second property was purchased
jointly in the name of one plaintiff and one defendant.
Procedural History: Thus, plaintiffs brought two separate suits for declaration of title,
possession, cancellation of sale deed, etc. The court rejected the plaints in both suits on the
grounds of not disclosing cause of action. Plaintiffs, therefore, appealed against the order of
rejection.
Issue: Whether the plaints in both the suits should be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 for
not disclosing cause of action?
Judgment: Plaint can be rejected only if the averments made therein do not disclose a
cause of action or on a reading thereof the suit appears to be barred under any law. In this
case, reading the plaint as a whole and proceeding on the basis that the averments made
therein were correct, it could not be said that the pleadings of both suits ex facie disclosed
that said suits were barred by limitation or any other provision of law or that they did not
disclose a cause of action. Thus, the plaints ought not to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11
CPC.

Order VIII – Written Statement

Key Concepts:

 Essentials of filing a WS
 Evasive & Specific Denial
 Set Off & Counter Claim
 Subsequent Pleadings

Essentials:
1. WS means a reply to a Plaint.
2. When there are several defendants, whether a common WS is filed or separate WS
for each defendant?
 common written statement may be filed by all the defendants which is signed by all
and verified by one of them who is aware of all the facts. (e.g. A files a suit against B
and C who are partners of an unregistered partnership firm alleging them for breach
of contract. Both B and C file a common Written Statement in the said proceedings
and such a WS shall bind both B and C.)
 However, a WS filed by one defendant does not bind the other defendants. [e.g. P
files a suit to ban Padmaavat against Sanjay Leela Bhansali Production (Defendant
No. 1 ) and CBFC (Defendant 2). Separate WS are filed by both the defendants. In
this case, the WS of Defendant No. 1 does not bind Defendant 2.]
Time Limit to file the WS
*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students
enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

Time Limit to file a WS:- (Rule 1)

a. 30 days from the date of service of summons which can be extended to a further period
of 60 days by a reasoned order. [ 30+ 60=90 days in total]
b. In commercial matters- 30+90= 120 days
(under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015)
Note: After the expiration of the said period of 120 days, the defendant shall forfeit his right
to file the WS.
Production of all documents: 1A
When a defendant bases his defence upon a document or relies upon any document in his
possession, he shall produce all such documents in Court with the WS
If a particular document ought to be produced in court by the defendant but is not
produced. Then such document, cannot be received in evidence unless permission of court
is taken.
The above rule does not apply to the following documents:-
 Documents reserved for cross-examination of Plaintiff’s witness.
 Documents handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.
Evasive and Specific Denial:
 New facts must be specifically pleaded. (Rule 2)
- All preliminary objections such as non-maintainability of suit.
- The disputed transaction being void or voidable.
- Defendant’s side of story.
 The denial must be specific. (Rule 3)
- I deny; I do not admit; I admit
 Denial should not be evasive or vague (Rule 4)
e.g.1 :-
A in his plaint makes a statement that B owed him Rs. 1000 and in the WS, B, in his denial
may state:-
I do not owe Rs. 1000 to A
Or,
I do not owe A, Rs. 1000/- or any part thereof. (Specific Denial)
Example 2:
Plaint- A has committed fraud, forgery and misappropriation of funds.
WS- A denies committing fraud, forgery and misappropriation of funds.
*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students
enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

or
WS- A denies committing fraud and/or forgery and/or misappropriation of funds. (Fool
proof denial)
Effect of evasive denial:- Rule 5(1) - Doctrine of Non-Traversal (if not denied, accepted)
Every allegation of fact in the plaint, if not denied specifically, or stated to be not admitted
in the pleading of the defendant, shall be taken to be admitted.
It is a well settled position of law that where a material averment is passed over
without specific denial, it is taken to be admitted.
Other point: Where the defendant has not filed a pleading, it shall be lawful for the court to
pronounce judgment on the basis of the facts contained in the plaint, except against a
person with disability. Rule 5(2)
Illustration 1:
1. Plaint- A alleged that B offered a bribe of Rs. 5000/- to the manager of A on 15th Jan
2018 in Lodhi Garden, Delhi.
2A. Written Statement: B stated the following:
“ I deny offering Rs. 5000/- to the manager of A on 15.1.2018.”
2B. “ I deny offering Rs. 5000/- or any sum, on any day, at any place, to the plaintiff’s
manager as alleged or at all.” (correct)
Illustration 2:
1. Plaint- A alleged that B offered a bribe of Rs. 5000/- to the manager of A on 15th Jan
2018 in Lodhi Garden, Delhi.
2A. Written Statement: B stated the following:
“ I deny offering Rs. 5000/- to the manager of A on 15.1.2018.”
2B. “I deny offering Rs. 5000/- or any sum, on any day, at any place, to the plaintiff’s
manager as alleged or at all.” (correct)
Set Off – Rule 6
 Set off meaning- Black Law Dictionary- “Debtor’s right to reduce the amount of a
debt, by any sum which the creditor owes the debtor”
 Where in a suit for recovery of money, the defendant claims to set off against the
plaintiff’s demand of any ascertained money legally recoverable by him from the
plaintiff, not exceeding the pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the Court, then the
defendant may at the first hearing of the suit, but not afterwards, unless, permitted
by the Court, present a WS containing the particulars of the debt sought to be set off.

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

 Effect of set off: The WS shall have the same effect as a plaint in a cross suit so as to
enable the court to pronounce a final judgment in respect both the original claim
and of the set off.
Essential elements of Rule 6
 When the suit filed by the Plaintiff is for recovery of money- (X amount)
 And the Defendant also has an ascertained money due from the plaintiff (Y amount)
 Such an ascertained sum of money (Y amount) is legally recoverable from the
plaintiff.
 Such an ascertained sum of money (Y amount) shall not exceed the pecuniary limits
of the jurisdiction of the court.
 It must be recoverable by the defendant or all the defendants, if more than one from
the plaintiff or from all the plaintiffs.
 In the set off, both the parties should fill the same character as they fill in the
plaintiff’s suit.
Types: Legal & Equitable
Note:- Claim for set off should not be time barred.
Court fees is paid by the Defendant on the amount which is claimed to be set off
Distinction between legal and equitable set off
Legal Set off Equitable Set off
 Ascertained sum of money  Unascertained sum of money
 Under Order 8 Rule 6  Section 151
 Right  Discretion of court
 Cross-demands may or may not  Cross demands necessarily have to
arise out of the same transaction arise from the same transaction.
 Court fees required to be filed by  No court fees.
the Defendant  E.g.:-Damages

Counter Claim – Rules 6A to 6G

 Inserted in 1976 with an intention to avoid unnecessary multiplicity of proceedings.
 Counter Claim is an independent/ separate claim made by the defendant in a suit
against the Plaintiff when there is a cause of action in favour of the Defendant
against the plaintiff.
 It may be in addition to a set off.
 A defendant may set up by way of CC, any right or claim in respect of action accruing
to the defendant, against the plaintiff either before or after the filing of the suit.
 CC should be within the pecuniary limit of the court.
Introduced in 1976:
A sues B for breach of contract.

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.
 © Prof. Yashmita Bhalla, Jindal Global Law School
All rights reserved

B has a case that the said contract is Void.

Prior to 1976, there would have been two suits- A v. B and B v. A.
Current Scenario:
 One composite suit A v. B in which A claims damages for breach of contract and B
can file a Counter Claim of getting a declaration of the said contract being Void.
 B pays court fees for the counter claim.
 There is one composite judgment deciding the claim and the Counter claim.
 Plaintiff files its WS to the Counter claim under Order 8 Rule 1.
 Even when the Plaintiff’s suit is stayed/discontinued/withdrawn- the CC can go on
as a separate proceeding.
 CC shall not be time barred.
How to draft a Counter Claim and Set off?
A Counter Claim can be contained either :-
a. In the WS filed under Order 8 Rule 1
b. By amending the WS under Order 6, Rule 17 and adding CC.
c. In a subsequent pleading under Order 8 Rule 9.
Set off Counter Claim
 The original suit must be a money  Original suit may be any suit.
suit.  CC need not arise out of the same
 Must be for an ascertained sum transaction.
(Legal set off) or it must arise out of  It is an independent claim
the same transaction (equitable set
off).
 Set off is a ground of defence.

Subsequent Pleadings – Rule 9

 No pleading after the WS of a defendant other than reply/defence to set off or
counter claim by the plaintiff should be filed by the parties.
 However, by taking the due permission of the Court, a party may file a subsequent
pleading such as Replication (also known as a Rejoinder) or Reply to the replication
(Sur-rejoinder)
Order 8 Rule 10
Where any party fails to file a WS either under Rule 1 or Rule 9 within the permitted time
frame, the Court shall pronounce judgment and decree against the defendant or make such
order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit.

*This material is exclusively for instructional purposes of the students

enrolled in this course – not for circulation. Unauthorized reproduction,
distribution, or use is strictly prohibited.