Withdrawal of suit or abandonment of part of claim
Full Text
(1) At any time after the institution of a suit, the plaintiff may as against all or any of the defendants abandon his suit or abandon a part of his claim: Provided that where the plaintiff is a minor or other person to whom the provisions contained in rules 1 to 14 of Order XXXII extend, neither the suit nor any part of the claim shall be abandoned without the leave of the Court.
(2) An application for leave under the proviso to sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the next friend and also, if the minor or such other person is represented by a pleader, by a certificate of the pleader to the effect that the abandonment proposed is, in his opinion, for the benefit of the minor or such other person.
(3) Where the Court is satisfied,—
(a) that a suit must fail by reason of some formal defect, or
(b) that there are sufficient grounds for allowing the plaintiff to institute a fresh suit for the subject matter of suit or part of a claim,
it may, on such terms as it thinks fit grant the plaintiff permission to withdraw from such suit or such part of the claim with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the subject-matter of such suit or such part of the claim.
(4) Where the plaintiff—
(a) abandons any suit or part of claim under sub-rule (1), or
(b) withdraws from a suit or part of a claim without the permission referred to in sub-rule (3),
he shall be liable for such costs as the Court may award and shall be precluded from instituting any fresh suit in respect of such subject-matter or such part of the claim.
(5) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to authorise the Court to permit one of several plaintiffs to abandon a suit or part of a claim under sub-rule (1), or to withdraw, under sub-rule (3), any suit or part of a claim, without the consent of the other plaintiffs.
Plain English Summary
Distinguishes between unconditional abandonment of a suit (which completely bars any fresh suit under Sub-rule 4) and withdrawal with liberty to file afresh under Sub-rule (3), which requires judicial satisfaction that the suit must fail due to a formal defect or sufficient analogous grounds.
Key Legal Elements
- Unconditional Abandonment (Sub-rule 1): Absolute right of plaintiff, but permanently bars fresh suit on same cause of action.
- Minor's Protection Proviso: Mandatory court leave + next friend's affidavit + pleader's certificate of minor's benefit.
- Withdrawal with Liberty (Sub-rule 3): Requires establishing a 'formal defect' (e.g., misjoinder, lack of statutory notice, valuation defect).
- Merits Defect Disqualification: Failure to prove title or insufficient evidence is NOT a formal defect; liberty cannot be granted to fill lacunae.
- Consent of Co-Plaintiffs (Sub-rule 5): One co-plaintiff cannot withdraw without unanimous concurrence of other plaintiffs.
Practical Note
Mastering Order XXIII Rule 1 Withdrawal Strategies: 1. Formal Defect vs. Defect on Merits - K.S. Bhoopathy v. Kokila (2000) 5 SCC 458 & V. Rajendran v. Annasamy Pandian (2017) 5 SCC 63: The Supreme Court authoritatively settled that permission to withdraw with liberty to file afresh cannot be granted to enable a plaintiff to cure a fatal omission or fill a lacuna on the merits (such as failure to prove a registered sale deed or non-examination of material witnesses). A 'formal defect' is one that does not touch the core merits of the controversy, such as misjoinder of parties, defect in court-fee, or failure to issue a statutory notice under Section 80 CPC. 2. Inherent Risk of Rule 1(4): If an advocate withdraws a suit without expressly obtaining written liberty from the judge in the order sheet, the client is permanently debarred from filing a second suit. The second suit will be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC (Sarguja Transport Service v. STAT (1987) 1 SCC 5).
हिंदी पाठ
(1) वाद के संस्थित किए जाने के पश्चात किसी भी समय, वादी सभी या किन्हीं प्रतिवादियों के विरुद्ध अपने वाद का त्याग (Abandon) कर सकेगा अथवा अपने दावे के किसी भाग का त्याग कर सकेगा: परंतु जहां वादी अवयस्क (Minor) है या ऐसा व्यक्ति है जिसे आदेश 32 के नियम 1 से 14 के उपबंध लागू होते हैं, वहां न्यायालय की इजाजत के बिना न तो वाद और न ही दावे के किसी भाग का त्याग किया जाएगा।
(2) उप-नियम (1) के परंतुक के अधीन इजाजत के आवेदन के साथ वाद-मित्र (Next friend) का शपथपत्र और प्लीडर का प्रमाणपत्र संलग्न होगा कि प्रस्तावित त्याग अवयस्क के फायदे के लिए है।
(3) जहां न्यायालय का समाधान हो जाता है कि—
(क) किसी औपचारिक त्रुटि (Formal defect) के कारण वाद का विफल होना निश्चित है, अथवा
(ख) वादी को वाद की विषय-वस्तु या दावे के भाग के लिए नया वाद लाने की अनुमति देने के पर्याप्त आधार हैं,
वहां वह ऐसी शर्तों पर जो वह उचित समझे, वादी को वाद या दावे के भाग को नया वाद संस्थित करने की स्वतंत्रता (Liberty to institute a fresh suit) के साथ वापस लेने की अनुज्ञा दे सकेगा।
(4) जहां वादी उप-नियम (3) में निर्दिष्ट अनुमति के बिना वाद वापस लेता है या त्यागता है, वहां वह हर्जाने का दायी होगा और उसी विषय-वस्तु पर कोई नया वाद संस्थित करने से हमेशा के लिए प्रवारित (Precluded) हो जाएगा।
(5) अन्य वादियों की सहमति के बिना कई वादियों में से कोई एक वादी वाद वापस नहीं ले सकेगा।