Plaint can't be rejected because 'plaintiff isn't entitled to any reliefs'- Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC cannot be rejected on the basis that "the plaintiff is not entitled to any redress in the litigation."

The plaintiff in this case sued the defendant for a permanent injunction. The Trial Court denied the defendant's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking to have the plaint rejected on the grounds that the plaintiff had a prima facie case of action after reading the plaint.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff has not requested any declarations, therefore the simplex suit for permanent injunction cannot be maintained, in a petition contesting this ruling at the High Court. The High Court dismissed the aforementioned petition.

The Apex Court bench remarked that the petitioner-position defendant's is that the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief in the lawsuit while taking into consideration the Special Leave Petition.

The aforementioned cannot be used as a justification for rejecting the plaint at the threshold in accordance with Order 7, Rule 11 of the CPC. The application under Order 7, Rule 11 of the CPC was properly dismissed by the learned Trial court, and the High Court should not interfere with that decision. We wholeheartedly concur with the High Court's position. The order from the bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh stated, "The Special Leave Petition remains dismissed.

The Civil Procedure Code offers the remedy of dismissing a complaint under Order VII Rule 11 on a number of clearly stated grounds, including:

(a) where it fails to set forth a cause of action;

(b) where the relief sought is undervalued and the plaintiff fails to correct the valuation after being ordered by the court to do so within a time set by the court; and

(c) where the relief sought is properly valued but the complaint is written on paper that is insufficiently stamped, an insufficiently stamped piece of

(d) if the lawsuit looks to be legally prohibited according to the plaint's assertion;

(e) if it wasn't filed in duplicate; and

(f) if the plaintiff doesn't follow Rule 9's requirements.

Gurdev Singh vs Harvinder Singh