Application under order 7 rule 11 cpc
Anurag Mittal
(Querist) 06 February 2014
This query is : Resolved
If during the time given for filing of written statement , Application Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is filed - Case is at Initial stages only. Can the applicant filing application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC be penalised by way of costs and his application dismissed stating that the grounds taken in Order 7 Rule 11 CPC should have been taken in written statement. ( Query - Is the aforesaid stated facts justified dismissing application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC...If that be the case then Order 7 Rule 11 CPC should have been repealed!!. Why a matter should go to trial - drag on when the maintainability of the case itself is questionable?
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 06 February 2014
what u want to ask?
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 06 February 2014
what u want to ask?
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 07 February 2014
If not satisfied with the order, go in appeal.
Anirudh
(Expert) 07 February 2014
The Order 7 rule 11 application ought to be disposed of independently. The contents of the Written statement has nothing to do for the disposal of the Order 7 Rule 11 application. Dismissing the application by stating that same grounds have not been taken in the W/S is defective. In fact the court is obliged to look at the contents of the plaint, and those in the O7R11 application and to adjudicate, without looking here and there. If the court has not done this, then you have to appeal against such an order of rejection of the O7R11 application.
(When certain objections are taken in the O7R11 application for dismissal or rejection of the plaint, nturally same/similar grounds would have been taken in the written statement as well. If such grounds have not been taken in the W/S then the defence will suffer to that extent.)
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 07 February 2014
YOUR REASONING IS RIGHT MR ANURAG MITTAL.
It is not even essential to file WS if application under O. 7 r.11 is filed.
The SUPREME COURT said -
This position was explained by this Court .......while considering Order VII Rule 11 of the Code, it was held as under:
“9. A perusal of Order VII Rule 11 CPC makes it clear that the
relevant facts which need to be looked into for deciding an
application thereunder are the averments in the plaint. The trial
court can exercise the power under Order VII Rule 11 CPC at any stage
of the suit — before registering the plaint or after issuing summons
to the defendant at any time before the conclusion of the trial.
For the purposes of deciding an application under clauses (a) and (d) of
Rule 11 of Order VII CPC, the averments in the plaint are germane; the
pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement would be wholly
irrelevant at that stage,
therefore, a direction to file the written
statement without deciding the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC
cannot but be procedural irregularity touching the exercise of
jurisdiction by the trial court…….”
ajay sethi
(Expert) 07 February 2014
well advised by anirudh and advocate defence
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate 
(Expert) 08 February 2014
I agree with the experts views on the application for rejection of plaint, a revision will be maintainable.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 08 February 2014
Revision is maintainable in the given case.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 February 2014
Well Mr.Anurag Mittal!
An application to reject the plaint on grounds stated in order 7 rule 11 can be moved at any time but before trail of the case.
For adjudicating such an application the court's jurisdiction is confined to application and plaint and nothing else on record,although such an application lies even after filing of WS but WS has nothing to do with adjudication of an application moved under order 7 rule 11 of CPC.
AND REJECTION OF PLAINT IS A DECREE WHILE ALLOWING IT IS AN ORDER.
HENCE APPEAL OR REVISION WOULD LIE ACCORDINGLY.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 February 2014
AND YOU ARE RIGHT THAT ORDER 7 RULE 11 IS INTENDED TO SAVE UNNECESSARY TRIALS.
