Pleadings: All you need to know

Introduction:

A pleading in law, as practiced in countries that adopt the English models, is a structured written declaration of the arguments or defenses of a party to the claims of another party in a civil suit. The pleadings of the parties in a case describe the issues to be resolved in the proceeding. In a case, it is a written presentation by a litigant setting out the evidence upon which he seeks legal redress or disputes his opponent’s claims.

A pleading contains charges and counterclaims, but not the proof that the litigant wants to prove his case.[1] It is the most important part of the legal profession. It has been said time and again that the lawyers should be very good with pleadings and should make it very clear and to the point. It is one of the most important jobs in the field of law. The entire case depends on how accurately and effectively is there pleading drafted by their lawyer. A pleading should contain all the points that the lawyer wishes to bring up in the court. Anything which is not mentioned in the pleading cannot be debated upon. A party can even lose their case because of their pleadings. The verdict is given upon the pleadings only and cannot be decided on the basis not written in it.[2]

In Kalyan Singh Chouhan v. C.P.Joshi, the meaning of pleadings in civil cases was illustrated. Even though the dispute deals with an election petition, the Hon’ble Court has dismissed the basic principles that stress the value of the pleadings.

In Krishnaji Gajanan Bapat & Anr. v. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe & Ors.[3], it was held that no evidence outside the parties’ pleadings can be considered by the court. The parties must take appropriate pleadings and determine by adducting evidence that the outcome of the election has been significantly affected by a clear irregularity/illegality.

Objectives of Pleading

The purpose of the pleading is to get the sides to the matter and the object of the rules pertaining to the pleading is to avoid an expanded problem. Besides, the parties themselves know what the problems in question are and what evidence they have to show at the trial.

It is considered to be a miscarriage of justice if the parties don’t get a fair chance to understand each others’ cases[4]. This can be avoided by drafting a very accurate and unambiguous pleading.

According to Leake and Bullen, Firstly, the main aim of the pleadings is to establish the issue of fact and questions of law to be resolved between the parties. Secondly, to provide reasonable notice of the case to be satisfied in order to allow the opposing party to guide its evidence to the matter disclosed to it and, thirdly, to include a brief description of each party’s case, which is readily available for comparison and from which it is easy to understand the essence of the argument and defense, and to provide a permanent record of the questions posed in the case to avoid future litigation over the same matter.

To sum it up, these are the main advantages of pleading:

• The large issues on which controversy emerged to a narrow and common issue are tapered down.
• It prevents the appearance of sudden and astonishing evidence in the proceedings and allows justice to be parodied.
• Brings inexpensive, less complicated, and approachable judicial trials.
• It removes irrelevant facts and materials that would waste the court’s time.

General Rules in Pleading

Order 6 of the Civil Procedure Code deals with pleadings in general, Order 7 corresponds with a lawsuit, and Order 8 deals with a declaration in writing. A description of the rules set out in Orders 6,7 and 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows:

1. In pleading, the whole case, in other words, set out in pleading, as the case may be, all relevant evidence on which you rely for your argument or protection.
2. If any matter of law is set out to damage the pleading of your adversary in pleading state facts and not the law, do not plead to it.
3. Mention only the relevant facts you rely on in the pleading and not the proof by which those facts are to be proven.
4. Don’t submit immaterial and needless evidence in pleading, state only material facts and do not argue for any subject which is not against you.
5. Claim the facts of the matter concisely, but with accuracy, in pleading.
6. It is not appropriate to describe the whole or any part of the document unless it requires specific terms, and it is sufficient to describe the results of the document as precisely as possible.
7. Any matter of evidence that the law presumes in your favor or that the burden of proof is up to your opponent’s party need not be claimed.
8. In pleading, the party does not plead with the conclusion of the statute.
9. In the written declaration, legal pleas such as estoppel, restriction, and res judicata or res subjudice, etc. can be pleaded.
10. In cases where the pleading party relies on any misrepresentation, deception, breach of confidence, deliberate default, or undue influence, the pleading shall contain information.

Fundamental Rules of Pleading

1. Pleadings should state the facts and not the laws:

The apex court held in Kedar Lal v. Hari Lal[5] that the parties to a civil suit are only expected to state the facts and circumstances that have arisen and on which they depend in the pleadings and the judiciary is obliged to apply the rule. This implies that the parties should state what their arguments are and why they should be made available to them.

Nevertheless, in Union of India v. Sita Ram Jaiswal, the supreme court ruled that if there is a point of law that is in dispute or that has become part of the dispute, the point of law must be clarified.

2. Pleadings should only contain the material facts:

The material facts should be mentioned in the pleadings. However, there is no clear distinction as to what is material and what is immaterial.

In the case of Udhav Singh V. Madhav Scindia, The facts which are used by the parties to either support or negate each others’ claims are to be considered material facts.

The courts have noted that what kind of evidence or knowledge will constitute a material fact is a subjective question and, depending on the circumstances of the case, the court will decide on a case-by-case basis.

3. Pleadings should not contain the evidence which is to be used to prove a fact:

The evidence must be omitted from the pleadings, according to this rule. In other words, the party is not obligated to mention before the court the written evidence or the witnesses it proposes to create to be used against the opposing party.

4. Pleadings should contain the brief facts of the case i.e., the summary of the case:

The last and final basic or fundamental law that is often referred to as the ‘rule of brevity’ demands that the pleadings be brief, unambiguous, and not capable of various interpretations, but only one interpretation that the pleader wishes to express.

Amendment of Pleadings

Amending a pleading means correcting the complaint or written statement already sent to the Court. There may be situations in which such information may not be accessible at a certain time, but maybe available at a later stage or when all material facts may not be recorded and an amendment provision is available in CPC in order to prevent such a scenario.

In paragraph 21 of Rameshkumar Agarwal v. Rajmala Exports Pvt Ltd. (2012) 5 SCC 347, the Supreme Court held that no real, valid and truthful, required amendments were rejected by the Court and that no deceptive amendments were ever permitted in the normal course.

Under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, the aim and objective is to allow either party to amend and change its pleadings in a just manner. The Court also claimed that an amendment cannot be demanded based on law and that while determining such prayers, the Court is not in a position to follow a hypertechnical approach.

Alternate Pleading

An alternative pleading is a legal term in the law of the US for a type of pleading which allows a party in a court action to claim several options that can be mutually exclusive by using legal fiction.

In the alternative, a pleading poses hypothetically or otherwise several demands or defenses, which can still be answered if one of the charges or defendants is considered false or inadequate.

For example, it must be a malicious attack or, if not, a gross negligence to lodge an accident lawsuit claiming that the claimant’s damage was so outrageous. It must either be a malicious attack.

During a seminar in New York in the late 1970s of the American Bar Association, Richard “Racehorse” Haynes gave this example: “You say you are suing me because you say you bit my dog. Now that’s my defense, my dog does not mord. And secondly, my dog had been tied up the night. Such claims typically appear to be mutually exclusive, but legally “even if” and “anyway” words need not be argued; mutually exclusive defenses may be advocated without pretext for their relationship to each other. Of course, the dual defenses of lawyers like “my dog was tied up” and “I don’t have a dog” may affect lawyers, but they must be weighed that protection might be not permitted if they are implemented too late.

Alternate Relief

Remedies are obtained in different ways in a lawsuit or as an alternative, such as demands for strict enforcement of a contract or monetary harm, to compensate for failure to fulfill a duty, or both. Modern pleading rules in courts now empower a party expressly to seek relief from the alternative. This avoids the extreme implications of common-law pleading, which allowed a party to make a request and to lose the petition in the case of another solution. Today, a party may request alternate means of relief and regain what later was proved most suitable for the trial.

Construction of Pleadings

It is quite clear that the pleadings are drawn up in the courts inaccurately and that the courts do not treat the claims so fastidiously as to put real cases to trial with no cause.

It is very clear that the facts given by the gatherings should be accepted without arguing, as it is furthermore similar that the claim should not be permitted to go beyond the gathering and that the gathering of the case, the pleadings, all are necessary and material fact.

However, a liberal creation should take place; no pompous approach should be used to resolve equality in the specifics of hair separation.

It’s not appealing to emphasize the framework excessively. The content of the statement should be regarded as all aspects are equal.

It was stated in Ram Sarup v Bishnu Narain Inter College, AIR 1987 SC 1242 that “it is well-conceived that the proof provided by the parries cannot, if any, be taken into account when there is not a pleading. It is also agreed that no party h shall be able to move outside its disclaimer and that the parties m support and case set up by it should plead the necessary and material evidence. The object of the pleading is to encourage the adversary to consider the case he must deal with. In order to administer a fair trial, the side must resolve the important material facts in order not to surprise the other party. However, the pleading should obtain a liberal approach to the derogation of the justice system from hair breaking methods, without any pedantic approach. Instead, the content of pleading must be considered.” It is not appropriate to put excessive emphasis on type.

Conclusion

This article attempts to explain the meaning of pleadings. It is evident as to how important pleadings are in the field of law. They can make a huge difference and hold the power to make or break a case. Nothing which is not mentioned in the pleading can be argued upon in the court. Therefore, a lawyer must pay special attention while working on it. The construction of pleadings in our country is still inadequate and not upto the mark. This fact is acknowledged by the judges as well and so some leniency is shown by them. However, there must be constant efforts to fill the gap.

---

References:

[1] Pleading, Encyclopædia Britannica, Apr 21, 2008, https://www.britannica.com/topic/pleading.

[2]Mishrilal Sunder Lal v. State of M.P, 1986 MPLJ 179.

[3] Gajanan Krishnaji Bapat & Anr. v. Dattaji Raghobaji Meghe & Ors., AIR 1995 SC 2284.

[4] Minakshi Sundaram Pillai v. Sthanutna, AIR 1953 TC 35, 361.

[5] Kedar Lal v. Hari Lal, AIR 1952 SC 47.