1. Introduction
The expression Cause of Action forms the foundation of every civil suit. It represents the set of facts that give rise to a plaintiff’s right to sue and seek relief through the courts. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) does not define “cause of action” explicitly, but the concept is embedded throughout the Code, particularly in provisions governing jurisdiction, pleadings, and institution of suits. Without a valid cause of action, a plaint cannot be maintained.
2. Meaning and Nature of Cause of Action
The term cause of action refers to the entire bundle of essential facts that a plaintiff must prove, if denied, to obtain a judicial remedy. It comprises every fact necessary to establish a legal right and the corresponding infringement of that right by the defendant. In simple terms, it is the factual basis on which the plaintiff’s claim is founded.
The Supreme Court in Bloom Dekor Ltd. v. Subhash Himatlal Desai (1994) 6 SCC 322 held that “cause of action” means every fact which, if traversed, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to a judgment.
3. Essential Components of Cause of Action
A cause of action typically consists of the following elements:
- Existence of a legal right: The plaintiff must possess a legally enforceable right recognized by law.
- Infringement of that right: There must be a violation or threat to the plaintiff’s right by the defendant.
- Entitlement to relief: The plaintiff must show that such violation entitles them to a remedy through judicial process.
All these elements must coexist; the absence of any one of them renders the plaint defective and liable to rejection.
4. Role of Cause of Action in Civil Procedure
The doctrine of cause of action performs several vital procedural functions in civil litigation:
- Determines Jurisdiction: Under Section 20(c) CPC, jurisdiction partly depends on where the cause of action arises, wholly or in part.
- Foundation of the Plaint: Order VII, Rule 1 requires every plaint to state the facts constituting the cause of action.
- Framing of Issues: The court identifies issues for trial based on the cause of action alleged and the defence raised.
- Res Judicata and Estoppel: Determining whether two suits involve the same cause of action is crucial in applying Sections 10 and 11 CPC.
5. When Does Cause of Action Arise?
A cause of action arises the moment the plaintiff’s right is violated or threatened by the defendant’s conduct. It may consist of a single event or a continuing series of acts. In A.B.C. Laminart Pvt. Ltd. v. A.P. Agencies (1989) 2 SCC 163, the Supreme Court held that the expression “cause of action” includes not only the right to sue but also the circumstances forming the basis of that right and its infringement.
For instance, in a contract case, the cause of action may arise at the place of contract formation, performance, or breach — each fact forming part of the cause of action relevant for jurisdictional purposes.
6. Absence or Defect in Cause of Action
If a plaint does not disclose a cause of action, it is liable to be rejected under Order VII, Rule 11(a) of the CPC. The test is whether the plaint, read as a whole, contains facts which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief. Absence of necessary facts or inclusion of vague assertions cannot substitute for a proper cause of action.
However, the court at the initial stage does not evaluate the truth of those facts — only whether they, if assumed true, constitute a cause of action in law.
7. Continuing and Successive Causes of Action
Certain wrongs, such as nuisance or infringement of recurring obligations, give rise to a continuing cause of action. Each repetition or continuation of the wrongful act creates a fresh right to sue within the limitation period. On the other hand, a successive cause of action arises from a sequence of separate breaches or obligations, such as instalment payments under a contract.
8. Judicial Interpretation
Indian courts have developed a consistent interpretation of the concept of cause of action:
- In State of Rajasthan v. Swaika Properties (1985) 3 SCC 217, the Supreme Court held that mere service of notice does not constitute cause of action unless a right is infringed.
- In Union of India v. Adani Exports Ltd. (2002) 1 SCC 567, it was held that facts forming part of the cause of action must have a direct nexus with the dispute, not a remote connection.
- In Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. Utpal Kumar Basu (1994) 4 SCC 711, it was reiterated that trivial or peripheral facts do not confer jurisdiction; the core cause of action must arise within the court’s territory.
9. Importance and Legal Implications
The doctrine of cause of action maintains procedural integrity and prevents frivolous litigation. It ensures that courts adjudicate only genuine disputes where a legal right has been affected. It also provides clarity in framing pleadings, selecting jurisdiction, and applying doctrines such as Res Judicata and limitation.
10. Conclusion
Cause of Action is the very cornerstone of civil litigation. It unites the legal right, the violation, and the remedy into a coherent claim for judicial redress. A properly pleaded cause of action not only determines jurisdiction but also ensures that justice is sought on a legitimate foundation. Its careful articulation is, therefore, indispensable to the fair administration of civil justice under the CPC.