KSLU Solved Question Papers
Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 9
2016 Dec (70 marks) Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 9 Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act 2016 Dec (70 marks) Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2016 Dec (70 marks) examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2016 Dec (70 marks) examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2016 Dec (70 marks) examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 2½ hours · Total marks 70 · 12 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1"Pleading should be confined to facts only. It should not contain law." Explain.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the source of the statement (Order VI Rule 2(1)) and its four parts: facts, not law; material facts only; not evidence; concise form; why the law is kept out (the court knows the law; issues of law arise from facts; notice to the other side); what counts as a fact though it sounds like law (custom, foreign law, mixed pleas such as limitation and res judicata need their facts); the Code's own short-cuts (Order VI Rules 9 to 13); the exception for fraud and like pleas (Rule 4; Afsar Shaikh); how the rule is applied (Ram Sarup Gupta, Bachhaj Nahar, Nagubai Ammal); conclusion.
The source of the statement
The statement restates Order VI Rule 2(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908: "Every pleading shall contain, and contain only, a statement in a concise form of the material facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defence, as the case may be, but not the evidence by which they are to be proved."
A "pleading" is a plaint or a written statement (Order VI Rule 1). So both parties are bound by this rule.
The four parts of the rule
- Facts, not law. A pleading states what happened, not the legal result. The plaintiff pleads that the defendant took a loan and has not repaid it. He does not plead the sections of the Contract Act that make him liable.
- Material facts only. Material facts are those a party must prove to win: the facts that make up his cause of action or defence. Facts that do not affect the result are left out.
- Not evidence. The pleading states the fact to be proved, not the proof. "The defendant signed a promissory note on 1-1-2024" is a fact. The names of the witnesses who saw him sign are evidence.
- Concise form. The facts are stated briefly, in numbered paragraphs, with dates, sums and numbers in figures and words (Rule 2(2) and (3)).
Why the law is kept out
- The court knows the law. A judge is presumed to know the law. A party does not need to tell him what it is. Legal arguments belong at the hearing, not in the pleading.
- Issues of law arise from facts. Under Order XIV Rule 1, the court frames issues from the material propositions the parties affirm and deny. Once the facts are pleaded, the court can see what law applies.
- Notice to the other side. A pleading tells the opponent the case he must meet. Facts do this. A list of sections does not.
- A party is not tied to one legal label. If a party pleads the facts, the court may grant relief under whichever provision the facts support. A wrong section quoted in a plaint does not defeat a claim made out on the facts.
What counts as a fact though it sounds like law
- Custom. A local custom, such as a custom of inheritance, is a fact to be pleaded and proved.
- Foreign law. For an Indian court, foreign law is a fact. A party relying on it must plead it.
- Mixed pleas. Limitation, res judicata and want of jurisdiction are pleas of law. But they rest on facts, such as dates or an earlier suit, and those facts must be pleaded. Order VIII Rule 2 requires a defendant to plead "fraud, limitation, release, payment, performance, or facts showing illegality".
The Code's own short-cuts
Order VI makes the rule workable by saying what need not be set out at length:
- Documents (Rule 9). The effect of a document is stated briefly, unless its precise words are material.
- State of mind (Rule 10). Malice, fraudulent intention or knowledge may be alleged "as a fact" without the circumstances from which it is inferred.
- Notice (Rule 11). Notice may be alleged as a fact.
- Implied contract (Rule 12). A contract implied from letters or conduct may be alleged as a fact, referring generally to the letters.
- Presumptions of law (Rule 13). A party need not plead a fact the law presumes in his favour, unless the other side has denied it. Consideration for a bill of exchange is the Rule's example.
The exception: fraud and similar pleas
Where a party relies on "misrepresentation, fraud, breach of trust, wilful default, or undue influence", Order VI Rule 4 requires full particulars, "with dates and items if necessary". Here a bare statement is not enough.
In Afsar Shaikh v. Soleman Bibi, (1976) 2 SCC 142, a deed of 1959 was attacked as obtained by fraud and misrepresentation. The plaint said only that the old executant trusted the defendant. The Supreme Court held on 6 November 1975 that undue influence, fraud and misrepresentation are separate pleas. Each must be pleaded with its own particulars. A general allegation of trust is not a plea of undue influence.
How the courts apply the rule
In Ram Sarup Gupta v. Bishun Narain Inter College, (1987) 2 SCC 555, the defendant had not used the exact word "licence" in his pleading. The Supreme Court held on 8 April 1987 that pleadings must be read as a whole, for their substance and not their form. The object is to tell the other side the case it must meet. If the material facts are there, the exact legal words do not matter.
In Bachhaj Nahar v. Nilima Mandal, (2008) 17 SCC 491, the High Court granted relief on an easement that no pleading had raised. The Supreme Court set it aside on 23 September 2008. A court cannot decide a case on facts that were never pleaded. Evidence on a plea never put forward is not looked at.
There is one qualification. In Nagubai Ammal v. B. Shama Rao, AIR 1956 SC 593, a plea of lis pendens was not pleaded, but both parties led evidence and argued it without objection. On 26 April 1956 the Supreme Court held the omission "a mere irregularity, which resulted in no prejudice". So the rule protects fairness. Where the parties knew the real point and went to trial on it, the omission does not defeat the case.
Conclusion. The statement is the core of Order VI Rule 2. A pleading states the material facts relied on, concisely, and not the law or the evidence. Law is left to the court, and issues of law are framed from the facts pleaded. Facts that only sound like law, such as custom, foreign law or the dates behind limitation, must still be pleaded. Fraud and undue influence need full particulars under Rule 4. Pleadings are read for substance, as Ram Sarup Gupta holds. But a case never pleaded cannot be decided, as Bachhaj Nahar holds.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 9 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.