Introduction
In a recent decision delivered on May 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of India in IEEE Mumbai Section Welfare Association v. Global IEEE Institute for Engineers (Civil Appeal No. 7235 of 2025) addressed a key procedural issue under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): whether a temporary injunction can be granted by an appellate court after the plaint in a suit has been rejected under Order VII Rule 11.
The Court held that once a plaint has been rejected, there is no subsisting suit, and hence, an application for temporary injunction cannot be maintained unless and until the plaint is restored. This ruling provides significant procedural clarity for litigants and courts alike.
Factual Background
The litigation stemmed from a commercial dispute initiated before the Commercial Court in Bengaluru. The Commercial Court, by an order dated March 12, 2025, allowed an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and rejected the plaint filed in Commercial Original Suit No. 906 of 2024.
The plaintiff/respondent (Global IEEE Institute) filed COMAP No. 181 of 2025 before the High Court of Karnataka, challenging the rejection of the plaint. Alongside the appeal, the respondent sought a temporary injunction through I.A. No. 1 of 2025, which the High Court granted on April 15, 2025.
This injunction was challenged before the Supreme Court by the appellant (IEEE Mumbai Section Welfare Association), arguing that no such relief can be granted once the suit is rejected.
Legal Issues Before the Court
- Whether a temporary injunction can be granted in an appeal filed against rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC?
- Whether the existence of a subsisting plaint is a prerequisite for seeking interim relief in a civil suit?
Arguments Advanced
Appellant’s Contention:
- Once the plaint is rejected, there is no pending suit in the eyes of law.
- An appeal against such rejection does not revive the suit automatically.
- Temporary injunction cannot be granted in the absence of a subsisting cause of action in a pending suit.
Respondent’s Contention:
- Interim protection should be available during the pendency of the appeal.
- The appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings, and the appellate court has the power to preserve the subject matter.
Court’s Reasoning and Findings
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court’s interim injunction order dated April 15, 2025. Key observations include:
- No subsisting suit post-rejection: Once a plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11, there is no existing suit before the court.
- Interim relief requires a pending suit: Temporary injunction is a discretionary relief that can only be granted when there is a live suit or proceeding.
- Appeal is not continuation of suit in such cases: Unlike appeals against interlocutory orders, an appeal against rejection of plaint does not revive the original suit unless the appellate court reverses the rejection.
- Injunction cannot restrain the defendant in vacuo: Injunctive reliefs operate in personam and are contingent on a pending cause of action. In the absence of a restored suit, there is no jurisdiction to restrain the defendant.
The Court clarified that the High Court must first decide the maintainability of the appeal, and only if the rejection is reversed can interim relief be considered.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s judgment delivers a critical procedural pronouncement under civil law. It reinforces that a subsisting plaint is foundational to any interim relief application, and litigants cannot seek injunctions in the absence of a live cause of action.
By disallowing injunctions post-rejection of plaints, the Court protects defendants from being burdened by ex parte reliefs in cases that, legally, no longer exist.
The High Court has been directed to expeditiously dispose of COMAP No. 181 of 2025, preferably by June 30, 2025.
FAQs:
1. Can a court grant an injunction after a plaint is rejected?
No. Once a plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, there is no pending suit, and thus, no basis for granting interim injunction.
2. What happens to the suit after a plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11?
The suit ceases to exist in law. The plaintiff can either appeal the rejection or file a fresh suit if permissible, but cannot seek reliefs in the rejected suit.
3. Is an appeal against rejection of plaint considered continuation of the suit?
Not in the legal sense. An appeal challenges the rejection but does not revive the suit unless the rejection order is set aside.
4. Can interim relief be claimed during an appeal if the plaint was rejected?
No interim relief like temporary injunction can be granted unless the suit is restored. Interim orders require a pending proceeding with a live cause of action.
5. What is Order VII Rule 11 CPC, and when is it applied?
Order VII Rule 11 CPC allows courts to reject a plaint at the threshold if it does not disclose a cause of action, is barred by law, or lacks necessary particulars.
Stay informed with insights that matter. Follow us for more updates on key legal developments.
Disclaimer
The content provided here is for general information only; it does not constitute legal advice. Reading them does not create a lawyer-client relationship, and Mahendra Bhavsar & Co. disclaims all liability for actions taken or omitted based on this content. Always obtain advice from qualified counsel for your specific circumstances. © Mahendra Bhavsar & Co.