Pleadings are statements in writing drawn up and filed by each party to a

case stating what his contentions will be at the trial and giving all such
details as his opponent needs to know in order to prepare his case in answer.
Pleading is defined in the Code of Civil Procedure as meaning a plain or
written statement. (O. VI, R. 1).
Plaint is the statement of a claim, in writing and filed by the plaintiff in which
he sets out his cause of action with all necessary particulars.
Written statement is the statement of defence in writing and filed by the
defendant in whom he deals with every material fact alleged by the plaintiff
in the plaint and also states any new facts which may be in his favour adding
such legal objections as he wishes to take to the claim.
In some cases a plaintiff, having filed his plaint, may, with the leave of the
court, file statement, or the court may require him to file a written
statement. In such cases the written statement forms part of the plaintiffs
pleadings.
Similarly, there are cases in which the defendant having filed his writtenstatement may, with the leave of the court, file an additional written
statement or the court may require him to do.
In such cases additional written statement also forms part of the defendants
pleadings. The plaintiffs written and the defendants additional written
statement are termed supplemental pleadings.

The whole object of the pleadings is to narrow the parties to definite issues
and thereby to diminish expense and delay, especially as regards the
amount of testimony required on either side at the hearing.
Rule 1 defines pleadings while Rule 2 lays down the fundamental principles
of pleadings.
Rules 3 to 13 require the parties to supply necessary particulars.
Rules 14 and 15 provide for signing and verification of pleadings.
Rule 16 empowers a court to strike out unnecessary pleadings.
Rules 17 and 18 contain provisions relating to amendment of pleadings.
"Pleading" is defined as plaint or written statement. According to Mogha,
"Pleadings are statements in writing drawn up and filed by each party to a
case, stating what his contentions will be at the trial and giving all such
details as his opponent needs to know in order to Prepare his case in
answer."
A plaintiff's pleading is his plaint, a statement of claim in which the plaintiff
sets out his cause of action with all necessary particulars, and a defendant's
pleading is his written statement, a defence in which the defendant deals
with every material fact alleged by the plaintiff in the plaint and also states
any new facts which are in his favour, adding such legal objections as he
wishes to take to the claim. Where the defendant, in his written statement,
pleads a set-off, the plaintiff may file his written statement thereto. Again, in

some cases, the defendant after filing his written statement may file an
additional written statement with the leave of the court.
3. OBJECT
The whole object of pleadings is to bring parties to definite issues and to
diminish expense and delay and to prevent surprise at the hearing. A party is
entitled to know the case of his opponent so that he can meet it. In other
words, the sole object of pleadings is to ascertain the real disputes between
the parties, to narrow down the area of conflict and to see where the two
sides differ, to preclude one party from taking the other by surprise and to
prevent miscarriage of justice.
In The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Surender Singh & others1,
The Honble Apex Court held that- It is well settled position of law that the
whole object of pleading is to give fair notice to each party of what the
opponent's case is, and to ascertain, with precision, the points on which the
parties agree and those on which they differ, and thus to bring the parties to
a definite issue. The purpose of pleading is also to eradicate irrelevancy. In
order to have a fair trial it is imperative that the party should state the
essential facts so that other party may not be taken by surprise. The parties
thus themselves know what are matters left in dispute and what facts they
have to prove at the proceeding and are thus given an opportunity to bring
forward such evidence as may be appropriate. The main object of pleadings
is to find out and narrow down the controversy between the parties.
Contention which are not based on the pleadings cannot be permitted to be
raised either at the time of arguments or at the appellate stage.
In the leading case of Thorp v. Holdsworth2, Jessel, M.R. stated:

1 I (2006) CPJ 43 NC
2 (1876) 3 Ch.D. 637

The whole object of pleadings is to bring parties to an issue, and the

meaning of the rules (relating to pleadings) was to prevent the issue being
enlarged, which would prevent either party from knowing when the cause
came on for trial, what the real point to be discussed and decided was.
In fact, the whole meaning of the system is to narrow the parties to definite
issues and thereby to diminish expense and delay. Especially as regards the
amount of testimony required on either side at the hearing.
In Sayad Muhammad v. Fatteh Muhammad, Lord Halsbury said: "
Whatever system of pleading may exist, the sole object of it is, that each
side may be fully alive to the questions, that are about to be argued, in order
that they may have an opportunity of bringing forward such evidence as may
be appropriate to the issues; ...... "
In Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram3, the Apex Court held that the
Procedural law is intended to facilitate and not to obstruct the course of
substantive justice. Provisions relating to pleading in civil cases are meant to
give to each side intimation of the case of the other so that it may be met, to
enable Courts to determine what is really at issue between parties, and to
prevent deviations from the course which litigation on particular causes of
action must take.
In Virender Kashinath v. Vinayak N. Joshi4, the Supreme Court stated
"The object of the rule is twofold. First is to afford the other side intimation
3 (1978) 2 SCR 614

regarding the particular facts of his case so that they may be m by the other
side. Second is to enable the court to determine what is really the issue
between the parties."

IMPORTANCE
Jacob states, Pleadings do not only define the issues between the parties for
the final decision of the court at the trial, they manifest and exert their
importance throughout the whole process of the litigation
Pleadings provide a guide for the proper mode of trial. They demonstrate
upon which party the burden of proof lies, and who has the right to open the
case. They also determine the range of admissible evidence which the
parties should adduce at the trial. They also lay down limit on the relief that
can be granted by the court.
In Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat & Anr. v. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe & Ors.5;
the Honble Supreme Court held that the court cannot consider any fact
which is beyond the pleadings of the parties. The parties have to take proper
pleadings and establish by adducing evidence that by a particular
irregularity/illegality the result of the election has been materially affected.

4 1999 (1) SCC 47

5Air 1995 SC 2284

In Ishwar Dutt v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr.6 And State of

Maharashtra v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd.7, the honble
Apex court held that the Pleadings and particulars are required to enable the
court to decide the rights of the parties in the trial. Thus, the pleadings are
more to help the court in narrowing the controversy involved and to inform
the parties concerned to the question in issue, so that the parties may
adduce appropriate evidence on the said issue. It is settled legal proposition
that as a rule relief not founded on the pleadings should not be granted.;
Therefore, a decision of a case cannot be based on grounds outside the
pleadings of the parties. The pleadings and issues are to ascertain the real
dispute between the parties to narrow the area of conflict and to see just
where the two sides differ.
In Sayed Akhtar v. Abdul Ahad8 and Bhuwan Singh v. Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd.9, The Honble Supreme Court of India held that there
may be an exceptional case wherein the parties proceed to trial fully
knowing the rival case and lead all the evidence not only in support of their
contentions but in refutation thereof by the other side. In such an
eventuality, absence of an issue would not be fatal and it would not be
6 AIR 2005 SC 3165
7 (2010) 4 SCC 518
8 (2003) (7) SCC 52
9 AIR 2009 SC 2177

permissible for a party to submit that there has been a mis-trial and the
proceedings stood vitiated.
In light of the above Judgments, it is evident that the court cannot travel
beyond the pleadings and the issue cannot be framed unless there are
pleadings to raise the controversy on a particular fact or law. It is, therefore,
not permissible for the court to allow the party to lead evidence which is not
in the line of the pleadings. Even if the evidence is led that is just to be
ignored as the same cannot be taken into consideration.

BASIC RULES OF PLEADINGS: RULE 2

Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 lays down the fundamental principles of pleadings. It
reads as under:
2(1) Every pleading shall contain, and contain only a statement in a concise
form of the material facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or
defence, as the case may be, but not evidence by which they are to be
proved.
On analysis, the following general principles emerge:
(i) Pleadings should state facts and not law;
(ii) The facts stated should be material facts;
(iii) Pleadings should not state the evidence; and

(iv) The facts should be stated in a concise form.

Principles in detail:

(1) FACTS AND NOT LAW

The first principle of pleadings is that they should state only facts and not
law. It is the duty of the parties to state only the facts on which they rely
upon for their claim. It is for the court to apply the law to the facts pleaded.
The law of pleading may be tersely summarised in four words; Plead facts
not law!
Thus, existence of a custom or usage is a question of fact which must be
specifically pleaded. Similarly, intention is also a question of fact and it must
be pleaded.
Again, waiver or negligence is a plea of fact and must be pleaded in the
pleading.
But a plea about maintainability of the suit raises a question of law and need
not be pleaded. Likewise, when Hindu sons are sued for a debt incurred by
their deceased father, it is not necessary to formulate in the plaint the Hindu
Law as to the pious obligation of Hindu sons to pay their fathers debt. Legal
consequences which flow from facts also need not be stated in the pleading.
So also, inferences of law to be drawn from pleaded facts need not be stated
in the pleading. The practice of courts is to consider and deal with the legal

result of pleaded facts, although the particular result is not stated in the
pleading. A construction or interpretation of a document, being a point of
law, need not be pleaded.

In M/S Strong Construction v. State of UP10, It was held that every

pleading shall contain and contain only a statement in concise form of the
material facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defence as
the case may be, but not the evidence by which they are to be proved. Basic
principle of pleading is that "pleading should refer to fact alone, it should not
be argumentative averment."
In Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin & Anr11, it was held that the court
cannot travel beyond the pleadings as no party can lead the evidence on an
issue/point not raised in the pleadings and in case,such evidence has been
adduced or a finding of fact has been recorded by the court, it is just to be
ignored.
This is based on the principle that a judge is bound to apply correct law even
if incorrect law is pleaded by a party.

10 AIR 2005 All 224

11 (2012) 8 SCC 148

A mixed question of law and fact, however, should be specifically pleaded.

Similarly, a point of law which is required to be substantiated by facts should
be pleaded with necessary facts.

(2) MATERIAL FACTS

The second principle of pleadings is that they should contain a statement of
material facts and material facts only. Though the expression material facts
has not been defined in the Code, it means all facts upon which the plaintiffs
cause of action or the defendants defence depends, or, in other words, all
those facts which must be proved in Order to establish the plaintiffs right to
relief claimed in the plaint or the defendants defence in the written
statement.
In Udhav Singh v. Madhav Rao Scindia12, the Supreme Court has defined
the expression "material facts in the following words: 'All the primary facts
which must be proved at the trial by a party to establish the existence of a
cause of action or his defence are material facts.
Recently, in Virender Nath v. Satpal Singh13, the Supreme Court stated:
The phrase material facts may be said to be those facts upon which a party
relies for his claim or defence. In other words, material facts are facts upon
which the plaintiffs cause of action or the defendants defend depends.
12 (1977) 1 SCC 511
13 (2007) 3 SCC 617

What particulars could be said to be material facts would depend upon the
facts of each case and no rule of universal application can be laid down. It is,
however, absolutely essential that all basic and primary facts which must be
proved at the trial by the party to establish the existence of cause of action
or defence are material fact and must be pleaded by the party.
The distinction between material facts and particulars cannot be
overlooked. Material Facts are primary and basic facts which must be
pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by it. Since the object and
purpose is to enable the opposite party to know the case it has to meet in
the absence of pleadings, a party cannot be allowed to lead evidence. Failure
to state material facts, hence, will entail dismissal of the suit. Particulars on
the other hand, are details of the case. They amplify, refine, and embellish
material facts. They give finishing touch to the basic contours of a picture
already drawn so as to make it full, more detailed and more informative.
Thus, the distinction between material facts and particulars is one of
degree.
In Virender Nath v. Satpal Singh14, the Supreme Court said:
A distinction between material facts and particulars cannot be
overlooked. Material Facts are primary or basic facts which must be pleaded
by the plaintiff or by the defendant in support of the case set up by him
either to prove his cause of action or defence. Particulars, on the other hand,
14 (2007) 3 SCC 617

are details in support of material facts pleaded by the party. They amplify,
refine and embellish material facts by giving distinctive touch to the basic
contours of a picture already drawn so as to make it full, more clear and
more informative. Particulars thus ensure conduct fair trial and would not
take the opposite party by surprise.
Whether a particular fact is or is not a material fact which is required to be
pleaded by a party depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.
All material facts must appear in the pleadings and the necessary particulars
must be there so as to enable the opposite party to know the case he is
required to meet and to put him on his guard. The rule is not of mere
technicality and, therefore, if a party omits to state material facts, it would
mean that the plea has not been raised at all and the court will not allow the
party to lead evidence of that fact at the trial, unless the court gives that
party leave to amend his pleadings. The Reason is that non-mention of
material facts amounts to non-pleading and therefore, no cause of action
arises in favor of such party.
What particulars are to be stated depends upon the facts of each case but it
is absolutely essential that the pleading, not to be embarrassing to the
defendant, should state those facts which will put his opponent on their
guard and tell them what they have to meet when the case comes up for
trial.

Thus it has been held that the plaintiff filing the suit on the basis of title must
state the nature of the deeds on which he relies in deducing the title.
Similarly, a party relying upon the fact that the notice of dishonor is not
necessary, or that the woman claiming maintenance has lost her right on
account of her incontinence or that the person who has signed the plaint in a
suit by a corporate body has authority under the Code, is bound to allege
those facts in his pleadings.

(3) FACTS AND NOT EVIDENCE

The third principle of pleadings is that the evidence of facts as distinguished
from the facts themselves need not be pleaded. In other words the pleadings
should contain a statement of material facts on which the party relies but not
the evidence by which those facts are to be proved. The facts are of two
types:
(a) Facta Probanda- the facts required to be proved(material facts), and
(b)Facta Probantia- the facts by means of which they are to be
proved(particulars of evidence)
The pleadings should contain only facta probanda and not facta probantia.
The material facts on which the plaintiff relies for his claim or the defendant
relies for his defence are called facta probanda, as they must be stated in
the plaint or in the written statement, as the case may be. But the facts or
evidence by means of which the material facts are to be proved are called
facta probatia and need not be stated in the pleadings. They are not the fact

in issue but only the relevant facts required to be proved at the trial in order
to establish the fact in issue. As observed by Lord Denman, C.J., it is an
elementary rule in pleading, that when a state of facts is relied on, it is
enough to allege it simply without setting out the subordinate facts which are
the means of producing it, or the evidence sustaining the allegation.
Brett, L.J. also stated, I will not say that it is easy to express in words what
are facts which must be stated and matters need not be stated. The
distinction is taken in the very rule itself, between the facts on which the
party relies and the evidence to prove those facts. The facts which ought to
be stated are the material facts on which the party pleading relies.
In Virender Nath v. Satpal Singh15, after referring the leading English and
Indian decisions on the point, the Supreme Court observed:
There is distinction between facta probanda (the facts required to be pmved
i.e. material facts) and facta probantia (the facts by means of which they are
proved i.e. particulars or evidence). It is settled law that pleadings must
contain only facta probanda and not facta probantia. The material facts on
which the party relies for his claim are called facta probanda and they must
be stated in the pleadings. But the fact or facts by means of which facta
probanda (material facts) are proved and which are in the nature of facta
probantia (particulars or evidence) need not be set out in the pleadings They

15 (2007) 3 SCC 617

are not fact in issue', but only relevant facts required to be proved at the
trial in order to establish the fact in issue.
The aforesaid principle is well illustrated in the case of Borradaile v.
Hunter16. A was insured with an insurance company. One of the terms ante
policy was that the policy would be void if the insured commited suicide. A
actually committed suicide by shooting himself with a pistol and thereupon
an action was brought against the company on the policy. The company
should only plead that A committed suicide. This is facta probanda. Other
facts, that A was melancholy for weeks, that he bought a pistol a day before
his death, shot himself with the said pistol and that a letter was found with
him addressed to his wife stating that he intended to kill himself-all these
facts are facta probantia and they need not be pleaded. Similarly, it is wrong
to set out admission made by the opposite party in the pleading, as that fact
is only evidence.
Thus, in an election petition the plea that cars were used by the successful
candidate for the purpose of conveying voters contrary to the Act must be
stated in the pleadings since it is a fact in issue (facta probanda). But the
facts as to from where the cars were obtained, who hired them and used
them for conveyance of voters are merely evidentiary facts (facta probantia)
and need not be stated in the pleadings.

16 5 Mann. & Gr. 639

It is however not easy to express in words what are the facts which must be
stated in the pleadings and what are the matters which need not be so set
out. The question must be decided in the light of facts and circumstances of
each case. To put it differently, the dividing line between these two classes of
facts (facta probanda and facta probantia) is often very difficult to draw, but
a fact as to which there is no doubt as to whether it should be placed in the
one class or the other should be pleaded.

(4) CONCISE FORM

The fourth and the last general principle of pleadings is that the pleadings
should be drafted with sufficient brevity and precision. The material facts
should be stated precisely succinctly and coherently.
The importance of a specific pleading can be appreciated only if it realised
that the absence of a specific plea puts the defendant at a great
disadvantage. He must know what case he has to meet. He cannot be kept
guessing what the plaintiff wants to convey by a vague pleating, Therefore,
the pleading must be precise, specific and unambiguous. A party cannot be
allowed to keep his options open until the trial and adduce such evidence as
seems convenient and handy.
The words in a concise form are definitely suggestive of the fact that
brevity should be adhered to while drafting pleadings. Of course, brevity
should not be at the cost of excluding necessary facts, but it does not mean

niggling in the pleadings. If care is taken in syntactic process pleadings can

be saved from tautology." Every pleading should be divided into paragraphs
and subparagraphs. Each allegation should be contained in a separate
paragraph Dates, totals and numbers must be mentioned in figures as well
as in words. Rule 3 lays down that forms in Appendix A of the Code should be
used where they are applicable; and where they are not applicable, forms of
like character should be used. The facts must be pleaded with certainty. In
other words, they should be definitely stated as facts, and should not be left
to be inferred from vague or ambiguous expressions. All material facts must
be stated in a summary form, as briefly as the nature of the case requires,
immaterial averments and unnecessary details must be omitted and material
allegations and necessary particulars must be included.

6. OTHER RULES OF PLEADINGS: RULES 4-18

Over and above the aforesaid basic rules, there are other rules of pleadings
dealing with cases of a Special nature. They have been laid down in Rules 4
to 18 of Order 6. They may be summarised thus:
(1)Wherever misrepresentation, fraud, breach of trust, wilful default or
undue influence are pleaded in the pleadings, particulars with dates
and items should be stated.
In Bishundeo Narain v. Seogeni Rai17, the Supreme Court observed:
17 1951 AIR 280

Now if there is one rule which is better established than any other, it is that
in cases of fraud, undue influence and coercion, the parties pleading it must
set forth full particulars and the case can only be decided on the particulars
as laid. There can be no departure from them in evidence. General
allegations are insufficient even to amount to an averment of fraud which
any court ought to take notice of, however strong the language in which they
are couched may be, and the same applies to undue influence and coercion.
What particulars are to be set out in the pleadings must depend upon Marts
of each case. As a general rule, so much certainty and particularity should be
insisted upon as is reasonable, having regard to the circumstances and the
nature of the acts. To insist upon less would be pretax old and intelligible
principles. To insist upon more would be the vainest pedantry.
(2)As stated above, the object of pleading is to bring the parties to atrial
by concentrating their attention on the matter in dispute, so as to
narrow the controversy to precise issues and to give notice to the
parties of the nature of testimony required on either side in support of
their respective cases. A vague or general plea can never serve this
purpose. Rule 4 has been evolved with a view to narrow the issue and
protect the party charged with improper conduct from being taken by
surprise. Therefore, if the particulars stated in the pleading are not
sufficient and specific, the court should, before proceeding with the

trial of should insist upon the particulars, which give adequate notice
to the other side of the case intended to be set up.
(3)The performance of a condition precedent need not be pleaded since it is
implied in the pleadings. Non-performance of a condition precedent,
however, must be specifically and expressly pleaded.
(4) Generally departure from pleading is not permissible and except by way
of amendment, no party can party can raise any ground of claim or contain
any allegation of fact inconsistent with his previous pleading.
(5)A bare denial of a contract by the opposite party will be construed only as
a denial of factum of a contract and not the legality, validity or enforceability
of such contract.
(6)Documents need not be set out at length in the pleadings such as unless
the words therein are material.
(7) Wherever malice, fraudulent intention, knowledge or other condition of
the mind of a person is material, it may be alleged in the pleading only as a
fact without setting out the circumstances from which it is to be inferred.
Such circumstances really constitute evidence in proof of material facts.
(8) Whenever giving of notice to any person is necessary or a condition
precedent, pleadings should only state regarding giving of such notice,
without setting out the form or precise terms of such notice or the
circumstances from which it is to be inferred unless they are material.

(9) Implied contracts or relations between persons may be alleged as a fact,

and the series of letters, conversations and the circumstances from which
they are to be inferred should be pleaded generally.
(10) Facts which the law presumes in favor of a party or as to which the
burden of proof lies upon the other side need not be pleaded.
(11) Every pleading should be signed by the party or one of the parties or by
his pleader.
(12) A party to the suit should supply his address. He should also supply
address of the opposite party.
(13) Every pleading should be verified on affidavit by the party or by one of
the parties or by a person acquainted with the facts of the case.
(14) A court may order striking out a pleading if it is unnecessary,
scandalous, frivolous, vexatious or tends to prejudice, embarrass or delay
fair trial of the suit.
(15) A court may allow amendment of pleadings.

(16) Forms in Appendix A of the Code should be used wherever they are
applicable. Where they are not applicable, forms of like nature should be
used.

(17) Every pleading should be divided into paragraphs, numbered

consecutively. Each allegation or averment should be stated in a separate
paragraph.
(18) Dates, totals and numbers should be written in figures as well as in
words.