Doctrine of Non Traversal under Order VIII Rule 5 CPC
Doctrine of Non-Traversal under Order VIII Rule 5 CPC
What is Order VIII Rule 5 CPC?
Order VIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with the consequences when a party does not specifically deny or "traverse" an allegation in the pleadings (specifically, in the written statement).
The Rule states:
"Where a party to a suit, in his pleading, does not specifically deny the truth of an allegation made against him in the pleading of the opposite party, the court shall presume that such allegation is admitted, unless the opposite party is required by law to prove the same."
Meaning of Doctrine of Non-Traversal
The Doctrine of Non-Traversal means that if a party fails to specifically deny or contradict a material allegation in the pleading of the opposite party, it is deemed to be admitted by that party.
In other words, silence or failure to deny equals admission.
Purpose of the Doctrine
To avoid unnecessary prolongation of trials by making parties responsible for explicitly denying allegations.
To ensure clarity in pleadings and avoid vague or ambiguous denials.
To promote judicial efficiency by narrowing down the points of dispute.
Application
The doctrine applies only to material allegations of fact.
It does not apply to conclusions of law or mere statements of belief or opinion.
It also does not apply if the law requires the plaintiff to prove the allegation despite non-traversal.
The defendant must make specific, clear, and unambiguous denials for the plea to be effective.
Illustration
Suppose the plaintiff pleads that he paid Rs. 1,00,000 to the defendant.
If the defendant's written statement does not specifically deny this payment, the court will presume the payment was made.
If the defendant wants to dispute the payment, he must specifically deny it in his written statement.
Key Points to Remember
Aspect | Explanation |
---|---|
When applicable | When a party fails to specifically deny a material allegation |
Effect | Allegation is deemed admitted |
Does not apply to | Legal conclusions, opinions, or allegations the other party must prove |
Role in pleadings | Encourages specificity and clarity |
Burden of proof | Does not shift burden of proof in all cases; some allegations must be proved by the pleader |
Case Law on Doctrine of Non-Traversal under Order VIII Rule 5 CPC
1. Lallu Lal v. Mahinder Singh, AIR 1965 SC 749
Held: If a party does not traverse an allegation in the pleading of the opposite party, it is deemed to have admitted that allegation.
Observation: The court stressed the importance of specific denial.
2. Raj Rani v. Prem Shanker, AIR 1965 SC 1863
Held: A general denial or a vague denial is not sufficient to avoid the application of Order VIII Rule 5.
The denial must be specific and clear.
The court noted that non-traversal results in deemed admission.
3. Sumati Dayal v. Gopal Dayal, AIR 1964 SC 1622
Held: Doctrine of non-traversal applies when a party remains silent on a material fact alleged.
Silence means admission.
4. Jameel v. Sahib Singh, AIR 1953 SC 196
Held: Mere silence or failure to deny an allegation means the party admits the truth of the allegation.
Specific denial is necessary to put the matter at issue.
Importance in Litigation
The doctrine puts the onus on parties to clearly specify their denials.
Prevents parties from avoiding issues by vague or ambiguous pleadings.
Helps courts identify the real points in controversy.
Encourages parties to be truthful and precise in their pleadings.
Summary
Aspect | Explanation |
---|---|
Legal Provision | Order VIII Rule 5 CPC |
Doctrine Name | Doctrine of Non-Traversal |
Meaning | Failure to specifically deny an allegation means it is admitted |
Application | Material allegations of fact |
Effect | Allegations deemed admitted |
Exceptions | Legal conclusions, matters required to be proved by the other party |
Key Requirement | Denial must be specific and clear |
Leading Case Law | Lallu Lal v. Mahinder Singh, Raj Rani v. Prem Shanker |
0 comments