Order XI Rule 14 CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Direct Production Of Document In Appeal Against Rejection Of Plaint : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court clarified that the power to direct document production under Order XI Rule 14 of the CPC is confined to the pendency of a suit and cannot be invoked after its dismissal. Therefore, if a suit is rejected under Order VII Rule 11, no additional evidence can be introduced in the appeal concerning the merits of the case.

The bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra heard the case stemming from the Karnataka High Court's decision, which upheld the First Appellate Court's directive to produce the mutation deed in regular appeal after the rejection of the suit.

The Court held that once a suit is rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the Appellate Court, while hearing an appeal against such rejection, is not required to assess the merits of the case or order the production of evidence that was not part of the original trial proceedings. The Court clarified that the Appellate Court's role is limited to reviewing the correctness of the rejection order and should not extend beyond that scope.

The present case revolves around the land dispute, where the trial court rejected the Respondent's/plaintiff suit seeking declaration and injunction under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Following this, a first appeal was preferred by the plaintiff, where the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and directed the tehsildar to produce 1939–40 mutation register invoking Order XI Rule 14 of CPC. The High Court upheld the First Appellate Court's decision.

Setting aside the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Justice Mishra noted that the High Court erred in affirming the First Appellate Court's direction to the tehsildar to produce the mutation deed, which was not part of the original proceedings. Further, the Court said that Order XI Rule 14 CPC could be invoked during the pendency of the suit and not after its rejection. It is based on the principle that once the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11, the suit terminates; no further evidence can be led.

Since the suit was rejected before the evidence stage, it was improper on the First Appellate Court's part to order production of the mutation register invoking Order XI Rule 11 CPC.

“In the case at hand, the suit preferred by respondent no.1 has already been dismissed by the Trial Court consequent upon the rejection of the plaint while allowing the appellants' application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. The stage for leading the evidence is yet to arrive in the suit. In Regular Appeal pending before the First Appellate Court, the Appellate Court is not enjoined to decide the merits of the controversy. The First Appellate Court will only examine the validity of the Trial Court's order rejecting the plaint. For the said purpose, the Appellate Court will see to the contents of the plaint and nothing beyond. No other documents can be seen by the Trial Court or by the First Appellate Court without examining the issue concerning rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC.”, the court observed.

“It nowhere enables the Civil Court (the First Appellate Court herein) to pass an order beyond the scope of Order XI Rule 14 of the CPC. The order passed by the First Appellate Court as affirmed by the High Court in the impugned order allowing the prayer made by respondent no. 1 for production of Mutation Register is totally misconceived and suffers from an error of exercise of jurisdiction; it deserves to be and is hereby set aside.”, the court added.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Case Title: SRI SHRIKANTH NS & ORS. VERSUS K. MUNIVENKATAPPA & ANR.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 502

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearances:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Thakur, AOR Mr. Anchit Singla, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Bedi, Adv. Mr. Ranvijay Singh Chandel, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Ms. Mary Vimala Bai P., AOR Ms. Mary Vimala Bai, Adv. Mr. Rajkamal Tanwar, Adv. Mr. Shivanagowda Dodamani, Adv. Mr. Ankit, Adv. Ms. Deepshikha, Adv.