- Supreme Court observed that under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a Court has the authority to reject a plaint suo moto.
- Before exercising this power, the court needs to hear the plaintiff. The court cannot reject the plaint from its application.
- The bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy added that Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory and that any suit instituted violating the mandate of Section 12A must be visited with rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11. Section 12A deals with pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement.
- Only if the plaintiff exhausts the remedy of pre institution mediation, he can contemplate any urgent interim relief under this Act.
- 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", the court held in this context.(livelaw.in, n.d.)
- In reference to Patasibai and Others v. Ratanlal the court answered the question whether the power under Order VII Rule 11 is to be exercised only on an application by the defendant and the stage at which it can be exercised?
- It was observed:
- A suit is commenced by presentation of a plaint. The date of the presentation in terms of the Limitation Act is the date of presentation for the purpose of the said Act.
- 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.
- Order VII Rule 11 is, in fact, silent about any requirement that it is the court’s duty to reject the plaint only on application.
- The presentation of a plaint, i.e. the pleading of the plaintiff in a suit; marks the institution of a civil suit. The Civil Procedure Code, 1908, provides for the remedy of rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, on certain specifically states grounds.
- In the recent case of Patil Automation Private Limited vs Rakheja Engineers Private Limited, the supreme court held that court Can Suo Motu Reject A Plaint Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
- The court also referred to the judgment in Madiraju Venkata Ramana Raju v. Peddireddigari Ramachandra Reddy along with some other judgements.
"Loved reading this piece by Krisha Mehta?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
