The power of decisive jurisdiction of the Civil Courts to try all Civil suits is enumerated and recognized under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). But this authority is subsidiary to the provisions of the Code itself; one of these limitations is stated under Order VII Rule 10. When a plaint is presented in a Court, it has the choices of accepting it or rejecting it or returning it to the plaintiff. The primary responsibility of a Court is to thoroughly scrutinise the plaint in order to determine whether it should be returned, or rejected and to decide, the dilemma of rejection, it is the duty the Court to take into consideration other materials too. The grounds for rejection of plaint are enumerated under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code.1

Order 7 Rule 1 of CPC3 lays down the innards of a plaint and a pleader cannot afford to miss some of these contents. If such a mishap takes place on the part of the pleader then the court is authorized to reject the plaint and the plaintiff has to resubmit the plaint after making essential alterations. However, rejection is not the first option before the court. In the case of Raghwendra Sharan Singh vs Ram Prasanna Singh 4 the cause of action had arisen when the affronted party challenged the gift deed after a time period of approximately 22 years from the date of the execution of the equivalent. For the situation, the affronted party had challenged the deed of gift with the accusations that the gift deed is a kitschy one subsequently not authoritative. The Hon'ble Apex Court, after hearing both the sides, in perspective on the realities of the case, held that the Law of Limitation unequivocally restricts this suit and the plaint should be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. Previously, in the case of Arivandanam v. T.V. Satyapal,5 it was held by the court that the purpose of the plaint has to be understood from its diction. If the plaint is infuriating and the court believes that it is filed with a spiteful intention to trouble the defendant and that there is absence of merit, it can be a lawful ground for rejection.


1 The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908).

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

4 AIR 2019 SC 1430.

5 (1997) 4 SCC 467.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.