Supreme Court restores plaint rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC before registration

G. Pazhanivel claimed ownership of a plot settled on him by his son, and said he had registered a sale deed in favour of S. Thilagavathy's husband only as security for a Rs.25,00,000 loan at 24% monthly interest, while remaining in possession. When the lender's wife refused to reconvey the property despite the plaintiff offering to repay, he sued for a declaration of title and an injunction. Before the suit was even registered, the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore, examined the plaint in detail and rejected it under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, holding the registered sale deed gave the defendant full ownership. The Madras High Court's Division Bench upheld the rejection.

The Supreme Court held both courts erred: rejection of a plaint, even at the pre-registration stage, is permissible only on a 'meaningful, not formal' reading showing the suit is manifestly vexatious and discloses no cause of action, as laid down in T. Arivandandam v. T.V. Satyapal. Here, the plea that the sale deed secured a loan, coupled with the plaintiff's continued possession, disclosed a triable cause of action that could not be rejected at the threshold. The plaint was restored for registration and trial on merits. The Court also directed that plaints rejected before registration must be recorded in the Register of Civil Suits under Order IV Rule 2.