What is Cause of Action in CPC?

In civil litigation, the concept of “Cause of Action” serves as the cornerstone upon which any legal suit is built. The term “cause of action” refers to the set of facts or circumstances that give rise to a legal claim, forming the basis for initiating a lawsuit. While the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) does not explicitly define the term, it has been interpreted and elaborated upon through various judicial precedents. In simple terms, a cause of action consists of two essential elements:

1. Cause: The existence of a legal right and its violation.
2. Action: The right to file a civil suit to seek redress for the violated right.

A plaintiff can bring forth a suit only if both elements are present. Without a valid cause of action, a suit cannot proceed in court.

Legal Interpretation of Cause of Action

The Supreme Court of India has played a crucial role in defining and interpreting the concept of cause of action through landmark cases. In Om Prakash Srivastava v. Union of India, the Court held that the cause of action refers to conditions that justify a reaction in law due to the violation of a right.

In the case of M/S. Sonic Surgical v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., it was observed that a cause of action comprises the “bundle of facts” that entitle a party to seek relief from the court. It is a prerequisite for a suit’s success, and the burden of proving it lies on the plaintiff.

Similarly, in Coke v. Gill, the court stated that cause of action includes every fact necessary for the plaintiff to establish a legal claim in their favour.

Provisions of Cause of Action in CPC

The Civil Procedure Code mentions cause of action at various places, emphasising its significance in initiating and sustaining a legal suit. Some key provisions include:

Section 20 of CPC

Section 20 of the CPC provides that a suit can be instituted in a court where the cause of action wholly or partially arises. This provision establishes jurisdiction based on the occurrence of events giving rise to the legal claim.

Order II Rule 2

This rule mandates that every plaint must include the cause of action. The plaintiff must ensure that all claims arising from the same cause of action are included to prevent subsequent litigation on the same grounds.

Order VII Rule 1

Order VII Rule 1 reaffirms the requirement of mentioning the cause of action in the plaint, ensuring that courts can evaluate the legitimacy of the claim.

Order I Rule 8

This rule clarifies that multiple parties may be represented in a suit without necessarily having the same cause of action.

Order II Rule 7

Order II Rule 7 deals with objections regarding misjoinder of causes of action and allows for their rectification if they arise at an appropriate stage.

Characteristics of a Valid Cause of Action

A valid cause of action must possess certain key characteristics to be legally sustainable:

1. Legal Rights: The claim must be based on legally recognised rights, derived from statutes, contracts, or legal precedents.
2. Legal Duties: The defendant must have owed a duty to the plaintiff, and the breach of such duty should form the basis of the claim.
3. Injury: A recognisable injury, whether physical, financial, or reputational, must have been suffered by the plaintiff.
4. Causation: A direct link must exist between the defendant’s actions and the injury sustained by the plaintiff.
5. Damages: The injury must be quantifiable and identifiable, warranting compensation for the harm caused.

Non-Disclosure of Cause of Action and Rejection of Plaint

Order VII Rule 11 of CPC provides grounds for rejecting a plaint at the initial stage if it fails to disclose a valid cause of action. This provision empowers courts to prevent frivolous litigation and save judicial resources. In Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali, the Supreme Court ruled that if no cause of action is disclosed, the suit should be dismissed to avoid wasting time.

Court’s Approach

• Courts generally adopt a liberal stance, allowing plaintiffs to amend their pleadings if the cause of action is insufficiently stated.
• However, if it is found that the plaint is filed with malafide intent or lacks substance, the court may reject it outright.
• It is essential to note that the court examines only the plaint and supporting documents without considering the defendant’s written statement.

Res Judicata and Cause of Action

The doctrine of res judicata, as per Section 11 of CPC, prevents re-litigation of the same cause of action once it has been adjudicated upon by a competent court. It ensures finality and prevents unnecessary judicial burden.

In State of U.P v. Nawab Hussain, the court held that res judicata bars the reassertion of the same cause of action to protect public policy interests and prevent the multiplication of litigation.

Illustrative Case Laws

1. Subodh Kumar Gupta v. Srikant Gupta: The Supreme Court dismissed the suit, ruling that the agreement in question was void, and jurisdiction did not lie in Chandigarh.
2. Bloom Dekor Ltd. v. Subhash Himatlal Desai: The court ruled that cause of action comprises the set of facts that support a plaintiff’s entitlement to relief.
3. M/S South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd. v. M/S Nav Bharat Enterprises Pvt.: Cause of action must include an act of the defendant to initiate a valid civil claim.
4. Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India: The tender was declared invalid due to non-fulfilment of eligibility conditions.
5. Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association v. Union of India: Emphasised the importance of determining the correct location where the cause of action arose.

Conclusion

A cause of action forms the backbone of any civil litigation, establishing the foundation for a valid legal claim. The CPC, through various provisions and judicial interpretations, has reinforced the significance of explicitly stating the cause of action in plaints to avoid unnecessary litigation and ensure efficient judicial proceedings. Without a valid cause of action, a suit cannot be maintained, and courts have the authority to reject baseless claims at the preliminary stage. Therefore, it is essential for plaintiffs to carefully articulate their cause of action to ensure a successful pursuit of their legal rights.