Justice K.M. JOSEPH of the Supreme Court of India writing for the judgment comprising of Justice K.M. JOSEPH and Justice HRISHIKESH ROY in Civil Appeal No. 5333/2022 today held that the trial court has power to reject a plaint u/o VII Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure suo moto.

In Para 68 of the judgment the Supreme Court held as under :-

68. On a consideration of the scheme of the Orders IV, V and VII of the CPC, we arrive at the following conclusions:

(A) A suit is commenced by presentation of a plaint. The date of the presentation in terms of Section 3(2)of the Limitation Act is the date of presentation for the purpose of the said Act. By virtue of Order IV Rule 1 (3), institution of the plaint, however, is complete only when the plaint is in conformity with the requirement of Order VI and Order VII.

(B) When the court decides the question as to issue of summons under Order V Rule 1, what the court must consider is whether a suit has been duly instituted.

(C) Order VII Rule 11 does not provide that the court is to discharge its duty of rejecting the plaint only on an application. Order VII Rule 11 is, in fact, silent about any such requirement. Since summon is to be issued in a duly instituted suit, in a case where the plaint is barred under Order VII Rule 11(d), the stage begins at that time when the court can reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11. No doubt it would take a clear case where the court is satisfied. The Court has to hear the plaintiff before it invokes its power besides giving reasons under Order VII Rule 12. In a clear case, where on allegations in the suit, it is found that the suit is barred by any law, as would be the case, where the plaintiff in a suit under the Act does not plead circumstances to take his case out of the requirement of Section 12A, the plaint should be rejected without issuing summons. Undoubtedly, on issuing summons it will be always open to the defendant to make an application as well under Order VII Rule 11. In other words, the power under Order VII Rule 11 is available to the court to be exercised suo motu.(See in this regard, the judgement of this Court in Madiraju Venkata Ramana Raju (supra).

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5333 OF 2022

(Arising out of SLP (C)No. 14697 of 2021)

M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS. … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

RAKHEJA ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED … RESPONDENT(s)

read the full judgment :-