Unit 2

[Virtual Presenter] The presentation welcomes students to explore the Civil Procedure Code, marking a significant milestone of 50 years of academic excellence at the university's faculty of law..

[Audio] The concept of a frame of suits refers to the initial stage of litigation where parties present their claims and defenses through pleadings. This framework provides a foundation for subsequent proceedings, ensuring that all relevant issues are identified and addressed..

[Audio] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, frames a suit by laying down its process. Its primary goal is to prevent multiple lawsuits and ensure that all disputes related to the same cause of action are resolved in a single proceeding. This principle is based on the idea that no one should be harassed twice for the same reason. Every lawsuit must cover the entire claim arising from the same cause of action..

[Audio] Order II of CPC is a mandatory principle that governs key aspects such as the obligation to bring forward the entire claim in one suit, the consequences of omitting to sue for any portion of the claim, the circumstances under which causes of action may be joined, the restrictions on joinder of causes of action, and the court's power to order separate trials. This principle has been established through numerous judicial pronouncements by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts..

[Audio] The Civil Procedure Code highlights the significance of drafting a suit in a manner that enables a conclusive determination of the contested matters and precludes subsequent litigation. This concept is exemplified through Rule 2, which specifies the prerequisites for initiating a lawsuit. These requirements guarantee that the entire claim is encompassed within the initial legal action, thereby forestalling future litigations over the same issues..

[Audio] A person who is entitled to multiple reliefs related to the same cause of action can choose to pursue all or some of those reliefs. However, if they fail to do so, except with the permission of the court, they will not be able to seek any relief that was initially omitted. This provision consists of two main situations, as explained by the Honorable Supreme Court in numerous decisions, including a recent judgment in 2020's Kalyanaswamy (D) v. L. Bakthavatsalam (D) case. The court clarified that Order II Rule 2 has three sub-rules. The first sub-rule emphasizes the importance of including the entire claim in the lawsuit. Sub-rule 2 addresses the consequences of omitting or relinquishing a claim, while sub-rule 3 deals with the omission of a relief. Notably, there is a distinction between omitting a claim and omitting a relief. According to the sub-rule, if a claim has been omitted, it cannot be pursued in any circumstances..

[Audio] There is an absolute bar to the second suit. Once a person omits a claim, they cannot subsequently bring a new suit for the same claim. However, if a person omits a claim in order to obtain relief, they may still seek that relief with the permission of the court. For instance, suppose A rents a house to B for a yearly rent of Rs. 1 lakh in 2017. The rent for all three years - 2017, 2018, and 2019 - is due but remains unpaid. In 2020, A brings a lawsuit against B only for the rent owed for 2018 and 2019, choosing to omit the claim for the rent owed for 2017. According to this rule, A cannot subsequently bring a lawsuit against B for the rent owed for 2017. This is an instance where A has waived their right to claim the rent owed for 2017 and cannot later pursue that claim. The court will not grant permission for A to file a new suit for the same claim. On the other hand, relief refers to the legal remedy for a wrong committed. In the same example, if the rent is not paid on time, A can request interest from the date it was due..

[Audio] If someone omits to ask for a specific relief, they can still file an application or make a prayer and obtain permission from the court to file for interest separately. However, if this permission is not taken, the bar of Order II sub-rule 3 applies, and the person cannot seek the same relief. The court's permission need not be explicit; it can be implied by the circumstances of the case. Additionally, permission can be sought at any stage during the proceedings. While the Bombay High Court previously held that permission should be sought at the time of filing the suit, this has since been clarified as being able to be sought at any stage in the suit. Ultimately, the decision to grant permission rests with the court, and there is no set formula for doing so, as each case is unique..

[Audio] The consequences of omitting a claim are clear. Although omission is typically unintentional, a plaintiff can still intentionally relinquish their claims. The outcomes for relinquishment are identical to those for omission. A plaintiff has the option to relinquish any part of their claim to bring the lawsuit within the jurisdiction of any court. However, by doing so, they cannot subsequently file a lawsuit seeking the same amount. For example, if someone lends Rs. 2200 to another individual, they could choose to sue for Rs. 2000 to bring the lawsuit within the jurisdiction of a specific court. They would not be able to file a subsequent lawsuit seeking the remaining Rs. 200..

[Audio] The object of this rule is two-fold. It ensures that no defendant is sued and vexed twice in regard to the same cause of action. Additionally, it prevents a plaintiff from splitting of claims and remedies based on the same cause of action. This rule bars a plaintiff who had earlier claimed certain remedies in regard to a cause of action from filing a second suit in regard to other reliefs based on the same cause of action. This is a salutary provision to prevent multiplicity of litigation..

[Audio] The Supreme Court has ruled that Order II Rule 2 does not prohibit a second lawsuit based on a separate and distinct cause of action. This means that if the second lawsuit is founded on a different cause of action, it will not be prohibited. The Court's decision in Sandeep Polymers (P) Limited v. Bajaj Auto Limited & Ors., (2007) 7 SCC 148 illustrates this point, noting that the rule aims to ensure the exhaustion of relief related to a cause of action rather than combining multiple causes of action within a single action. As a result, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to combine multiple causes of action, but it is essential to consolidate all claims and remedies arising from a single cause of action..

[Audio] A cause of action is a collection of essential facts or circumstances that a plaintiff must establish to successfully pursue a claim against a defendant and receive relief from the court. This bundle of facts includes all information that is crucial for the plaintiff's success and every detail that the defendant has the right to challenge or refute. Furthermore, a cause of action necessarily involves an act committed by the defendant that provides the basis for the plaintiff's complaint, as the absence of such an act would preclude any possibility of a cause of action arising..

[Audio] The primary criterion to determine whether the cause of action in the subsequent suit is identical to that in the first suit is whether the same evidence will maintain both actions. We need to see if the evidence provided in the first suit would sustain in the subsequent suit also. If the answer is affirmative, then the second suit is barred by Order II Rule 2. This has been consistently held by courts, including in cases such as Mohd. Khalil v. Mahbub Ali and Gurubux Singh v. Bhoora Lal. To establish that the cause of action in both the suits is the same, we need to examine whether the defendant would have to establish primarily and to start with, the precise cause of action upon which the previous suit was filed..

[Audio] The Court's stance on the plea of bar of Order II Rule 2 is clear. To establish this plea, the defendant must produce the previous plaint or evidence showing that the cause of action is the same as in the current suit. The Court cannot take cognizance of the previous suit suo motu; instead, the onus lies with the defendant to demonstrate that the cause of action is identical. If the previous pleadings are not presented, the bar of Order II Rule 2 does not apply. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has emphasized that the defendant must specifically plead the bar under Order II Rule 2 and an issue must be framed to focus the parties on this bar, otherwise, the court cannot reject the suit on this ground..

[Audio] The pleadings in the earlier suit should be exhibited or marked by consent or at least admitted by both parties. The plaintiff should have an opportunity to explain or demonstrate that the second suit was based on a different cause of action. In this case, the respondent did not contend that the suit was barred by Order II Rule 2 of the Code and no issue was framed as to whether the suit was barred by Order II Rule 2 of the Code. However, the High Court, both the trial bench and appellate bench, erroneously assumed that a plea of res judicata would include a plea of bar under Order II Rule 2 of the Code. Res judicata relates to the plaintiff's duty to put forth all the grounds of attack in support of his claim, whereas Order II Rule 2 of the Code requires the plaintiff to claim all reliefs flowing from the same cause of action in a single suit. The two pleas are different and one will not include the other. The dismissal of the suit by the High Court under Order II Rule 2 of the Code, in the absence of any plea by the defendant and in the absence of an issue in that behalf, was held to be unsustainable..

[Audio] The provision under Order II Rule 2 is penal in nature, as it bars the plaintiff from filing a claim that he ignored unintentionally or even intentionally. This provision should be construed strictly, and has been done so by the Supreme Court in several situations..

[Audio] Only certain claims can be joined for recovery of immovable property, including those for mesne profits, rent, damages for breach of contract, and injuries to property, according to Rule 4. These claims can be allowed for joinder of cause of action without the need for court approval..

[Audio] Claims by or against an executor, administrator or heir cannot be joined by or against them personally. However, this rule has a condition that the claims must relate to the estate of the deceased person whom they represent. Additionally, these claims can also be those that the executor, administrator or heir was entitled to or liable for, jointly with the deceased person..

[Audio] The Civil Procedure Code permits the court to issue separate trials or make other orders in the interest of justice. Specifically, it sets forth rules governing objections to misjoinder of causes of action. Pursuant to Rule 7, such objections must be raised at the earliest feasible moment, either prior to or during the determination of issues. Failing to do so will render the objection ineffective..

[Audio] The landmark judgment Gurbux Singh v. Bhooralal (1964) held that a plea under Order II Rule 2 of CPC would succeed if three conditions were met. These conditions included establishing that the second suit concerned the same cause of action as the previous suit, showing that the plaintiff was entitled to more than one relief with regard to that cause of action, and demonstrating that the plaintiff failed to seek the additional relief without first obtaining permission from the court..

[Audio] The court held that the bar of Order II Rule 2 of CPC may not apply to writ petitions..

[Audio] The purpose of pleadings is to guarantee that the court obtains a thorough presentation of the merits, thereby fostering fairness and completeness in the adjudication process..

[Audio] Pleadings under the Code of Civil Procedure refer to the formal written statements submitted by the parties involved in a civil suit. These documents outline the claims and defences of the plaintiff and the defendant, setting the stage for legal proceedings. The primary goal of pleadings is to clearly define the issues in dispute, allowing the court to understand the case and ensuring a fair and efficient trial. The Code of Civil Procedure defines two main types of pleadings: the plaint and the written statement. The plaint is the document filed by the plaintiff, detailing the facts of the case, the legal basis for the claim, and the relief sought. The written statement is the response submitted by the defendant, addressing the allegations made in the plaint and presenting any defences..

[Audio] Pleadings must adhere to specific rules, such as stating only material facts, avoiding legal arguments and excluding evidence. This ensures that the focus remains on the facts in dispute, allowing the court to apply the relevant law during the trial. Properly crafted pleadings help streamline the judicial process, minimize misunderstandings and ensure that both parties have a fair opportunity to present their case. The four objectives of pleading are to ascertain the actual issues between the parties, state the issues to avoid surprise to the other party, narrow down the area of conflict, and present a clear and concise account of the case to the court..

[Audio] Pleadings state the facts that need to be proven at the trial. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the purpose of this rule is twofold. Firstly, it allows the opposing side to become aware of the specific facts of their case, enabling them to respond accordingly. Secondly, it enables the court to determine what the real issue is between the parties. The significance of pleadings cannot be overstated, as the outcome of the lawsuit relies heavily on the pleadings. Ultimately, the pleadings determine the burden of proof..

[Audio] The essence of the rules of pleading lies in the phrase "Plead facts, not law." This principle demands that counsel for both parties concentrate on presenting the facts of their case rather than interpreting or suggesting applicable laws..

[Audio] Parties must plead facts, not law, according to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This principle was first emphasized in the case of Kedar Lal v. Hari Lal, where it was held that parties must state the facts upon which they base their claims. The court applies the law to these facts to render a judgment. Only material facts should be included in pleadings, as immaterial facts are not considered..

[Audio] Material facts include all facts upon which the plaintiff claims damages or rights or upon which the defendant bases his defense. These material facts should be stated in pleadings, excluding any evidence that would prove them. There are two categories of facts: material facts that require proof, known as facts probanda, and the evidence used to support a case, known as facts probantia. Only material facts should be included in pleadings..

[Audio] When presenting facts, it's crucial to do so concisely, ensuring brevity and clarity without compromising essential information. In addition to the fundamental rules, there are various particulars or specific regulations that must be followed. In cases where fraud, misrepresentation, breach of trust, undue influence, or willful default are implicated, particulars including dates and items must be explicitly stated..

[Audio] Consistency in pleadings is generally not permissible except through amendments. New grounds or inconsistent allegations cannot be introduced without proper amendments. When a condition precedent is not performed, it must be specifically mentioned. Performance is implied and does not need to be pleaded. Denying a contract implies denying the facts of the contract, not its validity, enforceability, or legality. Allegations about conditions of the mind, such as malice, fraudulent intent, or knowledge, can be made as factual claims without providing details about the circumstances that led to those conclusions..

[Audio] When drafting pleadings, only material facts should be included, excluding any immaterial ones. Additionally, when a notice is required as a prerequisite, it should be mentioned without going into details about its format or circumstances unless relevant. Implied relationships or contracts can be generally alleged without providing specifics about the conversations or letters used to infer them. Furthermore, facts related to the burden of proof or favoring a party should not be included in the pleading. Finally, every pleading must be signed by either the party themselves or their representative..

[Audio] The courts have the authority to strike out pleadings that are deemed scandalous, frivolous, unnecessary or intended to cause embarrassment, prejudice or delay a fair trial. Every pleading must be supported by an affidavit from the party or someone familiar with the facts. The party to the suit must provide their address and that of the opposite party. Amendments to pleadings can be made by the court to ensure justice..

[Audio] Pleadings should be structured and clear, with each paragraph containing a separate allegation or argument, ensuring that the court can easily follow the sequence of events and understand the claims being made. Dates, sums, and totals should also be clearly expressed in both figures and words, making it easier for all parties involved to comprehend the information. Moreover, whenever possible, forms from Appendix A of the Code should be used, and if not applicable, similar forms should be employed, which helps maintain consistency and clarity throughout the pleading..

[Audio] The courts recognize the importance of complete merit disclosure, and they have the authority to allow the amendment of pleadings. Significant merits are often missing or discovered later during the initial pleading stage, and this concept applies in such situations. According to Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC, parties are granted permission to modify their pleadings at any point in the legal process, acknowledging that a case's development may require adjustments to ensure a thorough presentation of merits..

[Audio] The court permits amendments to pleadings even after trial commencement, but with certain restrictions. Exceptions exist if a party could not raise the issue earlier, despite diligent efforts. This demonstrates the court's willingness to adapt to unforeseen situations or new information. For instance, if someone files a lawsuit due to time constraints and later discovers the omission of critical facts, evidence, or documents in the initial pleading, the court may allow modifications to ensure a more comprehensive presentation of the case's merits..

[Audio] The court's discretion plays a crucial role in determining whether to allow amendments to pleadings. Factors such as the diligence shown by the party seeking the amendment, the nature of the omitted information, and the stage of the proceedings are all taken into account. Furthermore, it is worth noting that applications to amend pleadings are exempt from limitation laws, allowing parties to adapt to changing circumstances at any point during the case..

[Audio] The Supreme Court has emphasized that amendments should not be rejected if necessary and made in good faith, with the main consideration being to promote fairness and completeness in the adjudication process by preventing unnecessary multiple disputes..

[Audio] The proposed amendment is essential for ascertaining the genuine controversy in the suit. By contributing to a clearer, more accurate presentation of the issues at hand, it ensures that the court can adjudicate based on a precise understanding of the real dispute. Furthermore, this amendment aims to shorten the duration of litigation, expediting the resolution of the dispute..

[Audio] Courts favor amendments that streamline the litigation process, promoting efficiency and reducing the time spent on unnecessary legal proceedings. An incomplete cause of action is initially pleaded in the suit. If the original pleading lacks essential elements required for a complete cause of action, amendments become necessary to rectify these omissions and ensure the legal claim is comprehensive. Omission of Necessary Facts: Some crucial facts were not initially included when the suit was filed. Valid amendments include the addition of facts that were unintentionally omitted during the initial pleading, ensuring that all relevant information is presented for a fair adjudication..

[Audio] When incorrect facts are inadvertently left out during the initial pleading, it is essential to correct them to ensure that all relevant information is presented for a fair adjudication. This correction can take the form of correcting inaccurate property descriptions, for instance. Furthermore, if there are errors in the factual details initially provided, amendments are permissible. By correcting these inaccuracies, we can guarantee that the court's understanding aligns with the actual circumstances. Both the plaintiff and the defendant have the right to apply for amendments to pleadings, allowing for flexibility and fairness in the legal process..

[Audio] The plaintiff has the authority to seek amendments in the plaint, refining or expanding upon their original claims, adapting to the evolving dynamics of the case. Similarly, the defendant can apply for amendments in the written statement, outlining defenses and counterclaims, ensuring a balanced legal process. This inclusivity guarantees fairness in the legal process, allowing either party to rectify, enhance, or clarify their respective positions..

[Audio] The courts acknowledge the significance of permitting adjustments to their defenses based on emerging facts or legal considerations. This adaptability allows parties to adjust to new information or shifting circumstances, ensuring that the court's verdict is grounded in the most accurate and pertinent facts. In cases involving multiple plaintiffs or defendants, this adaptability recognizes the cooperative or independent character of legal claims, enabling any of the parties to initiate the amendment process. Notice for amendment applications is crucial, as granting an amendment without hearing from the other party could result in unfairness or prejudice..

[Audio] The principle of procedural fairness is fundamental to the legal process, guaranteeing that both parties have the chance to present their case and react to proposed modifications. When an amendment is sought in a pleading, particularly in the plaint, notice of the amendment is required. Giving notice serves as a procedural safeguard, informing the opposing party of the proposed changes and providing them with the opportunity to respond or challenge the amendment. In particular, when an amendment is made to the plaint, a notice of the amended plaint is obligatory..

[Audio] When an amendment is made to the plaint, it is essential to serve a notice to the defendant, informing them of any changes made to the plaintiff's claim and providing an opportunity for them to prepare a response. Serving this notice directly to the defendant ensures that they receive timely and accurate information about the amendments, maintaining transparency and adherence to procedural fairness..

[Audio] The opportunity for response serves as a safeguard against unfairness by providing the defendant with a chance to respond or object to the proposed amendments. This step ensures that the rights of defendants are protected and their views are heard before a decision is made. Furthermore, it preserves fair adjudication by allowing both parties to participate actively in the proceedings and preventing unilateral changes that could compromise the integrity of the case..