Particulars in Money Suits and Suits for Immovable Property under CPC

Civil Procedure

This note explains the legal requirement of particulars in money and property suits under CPC, highlighting statutory rules, procedure, and judicial interpretation for clarity and fairness in pleadings.

14 November 2025

1. Introduction

In civil litigation, especially in money suits and suits involving immovable property, the details provided in the plaint play a crucial role. These details, known as "particulars," help the defendant understand the nature of the claim and allow the court to assess the merits of the case. Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), furnishing accurate and complete particulars ensures procedural fairness and prevents vague or baseless claims.

2. Statutory Basis

The requirement to state particulars is governed by Order VI Rule 2 and Order VII Rule 1 of the CPC. These provisions mandate that pleadings must contain material facts, and the plaint must include specific details such as the cause of action, the relief claimed, and the valuation of the suit. In suits for money or immovable property, additional particulars are often required to establish the claim clearly.

3. Meaning and Concept

"Particulars" refer to the essential factual details that support the plaintiff’s claim. In money suits, this includes the amount claimed, the basis of the debt, and any relevant transactions. In suits for immovable property, particulars include the description of the property, ownership details, possession status, and boundaries. These particulars help avoid ambiguity and ensure that the defendant is not taken by surprise.

4. Object and Purpose

The main purpose of requiring particulars is to promote transparency and procedural clarity. It allows the defendant to prepare an effective defense and helps the court identify the real issues in dispute. In money suits, it prevents inflated or speculative claims. In property suits, it ensures that the property in question is clearly identified, avoiding confusion or overlapping claims.

5. Procedure or Application

The CPC lays down a structured approach for including particulars in the plaint:

  1. The plaintiff must state the material facts supporting the claim (Order VI Rule 2).
  2. In money suits, the exact amount claimed and the basis (e.g., loan, contract) must be mentioned.
  3. In property suits, the property must be described with boundaries, survey numbers, or municipal identifiers.
  4. The valuation of the suit must be provided for jurisdiction and court fee purposes (Order VII Rule 1).
  5. If particulars are vague or missing, the court may direct the plaintiff to furnish better particulars.

6. Judicial Interpretation

  • Virendra Nath v. Satpal Singh (AIR 2003 SC 4285) – The Supreme Court emphasized that pleadings must contain clear particulars to avoid prejudice to the defendant.
  • Udhav Singh v. Madhav Rao Scindia (AIR 1976 SC 744) – Held that absence of material particulars can render a pleading defective.
  • Balraj Taneja v. Sunil Madan (AIR 1999 SC 3381) – Reiterated that vague pleadings without particulars cannot form the basis of a decree.

7. Importance and Practical Significance

Including proper particulars in suits is not just a legal formality — it has real-world importance in ensuring justice and procedural efficiency.

  • Helps the defendant understand the claim and respond effectively.
  • Enables the court to frame issues and conduct a fair trial.
  • Prevents misuse of the legal process through vague or exaggerated claims.

8. Limitations or Exceptions

While particulars are essential, courts may allow some flexibility in cases where the plaintiff lacks access to full information at the time of filing. However, failure to provide particulars despite court directions can lead to rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11. Also, excessive detail may be discouraged if it clutters the pleadings without adding clarity.

9. Comparative or Analytical Note

In common law jurisdictions like the UK, the concept of “particulars of claim” serves a similar purpose — ensuring that the defendant knows the case they must meet. Indian CPC adopts a comparable approach but allows more judicial discretion in directing better particulars.

10. Conclusion

Particulars in money suits and suits for immovable property are the backbone of effective pleadings. They ensure clarity, fairness, and judicial efficiency. By mandating specific details, the CPC upholds the principle that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done — with transparency and precision.

Back to All Notes