Supreme Court in Ram Sarup Gupta v. Bishun Narain Inter College:

"6. ... It is well settled that in the absence of pleading, evidence, if any, produced by the parties cannot be considered. It is also equally settled that no party should be permitted to travel beyond its pleading and that all necessary and material facts should be pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by it. The object and purpose of pleading is to enable the adversary party to know the case it has to meet. In order to have a fair trial it is imperative that the party should settle the essential material facts so that other party may not be taken by surprise.

The pleadings however should receive a liberal construction; no pedantic approach should be adopted to defeat justice on hair-splitting technicalities. Sometimes, pleadings are expressed in words which may not expressly make out a case in accordance with strict interpretation of law. In such a case it is the duty of the court to ascertain the substance of the pleadings to determine the question. It is not desirable to place undue emphasis on form, instead the substance of the pleadings should be considered.

Whenever the question about lack of pleading is raised the enquiry should not be so much about the form of the pleadings; instead the court must find out whether in substance the parties knew the case and the issues upon which they went to trial. Once it is found that in spite of deficiency in the pleadings parties knew the case and they proceeded to trial on those issues by producing evidence, in that event it would not be open to a party to raise the question of absence of pleadings in appeal."

)Nandkishore Lalbhai Mehta Vs. New Era Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

[Civil Appeal No. 1148 of 2010]

[Civil Appeal Nos. 1131-1132 of 2010]

R.K. Agrawal, J.

Civil Appeal No. 1148 of 2010

No amount of evidence can be looked into, upon a plea which was never put forward in the pleadings. A question which did arise from the pleadings and which was not the subject-matter of an issue, cannot be decided by the court.

(ii) A court cannot make out a case not pleaded. The court should confine its decision to the question raised in pleadings. Nor can it grant a relief which is not claimed and which does not flow from the facts and the cause of action alleged in the plaint.

(iii) A factual issue cannot be raised or considered for the first time in a second appeal.

The Civil Procedure Code is an elaborate codification of the principles of natural justice to be applied to civil litigation. The provisions are so elaborate that many a time, fulfilment of the procedural requirements of the Code may itself contribute to delay. But any anxiety to cut the delay or further litigation should not be a ground to flout the settled fundamental rules of civil procedure. Be that as it may. We will briefly set out the reasons for the aforesaid conclusions.

The object and purpose of pleadings and issues is to ensure that the litigants come to trial with all issues clearly defined and to prevent cases being expanded or grounds being shifted during trial. Its object is also to ensure that each side is fully alive to the questions that are likely to be raised or considered so that they may have an opportunity of placing the relevant evidence appropriate to the issues before the court for its consideration. This Court has repeatedly held that the pleadings are meant to give to each side intimation of the case of the other so that it may be met, to enable courts to determine what is really at issue between the parties, and to prevent any deviation from the course which litigation on particular causes must take.

The object of issues is to identify from the pleadings the questions or points required to be decided by the courts so as to enable parties to let in evidence thereon. When the facts necessary to make out a particular claim, or to seek a particular relief, are not found in the plaint, the court cannot focus the attention of the parties, or its own attention on that claim or relief, by framing an appropriate issue. As a result the defendant does not get an opportunity to place the facts and contentions necessary to repudiate or challenge such a claim or relief.

In AIR 2001 Supreme Court 490 the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held:

The correct decision of civil lis largely depends on the correct framing of issues correctly determining the real point in controversy which need to be decided. The scheme of Order 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to settlement of issues shows that and issue arises when a material proposition of fact or law is affirmed by one party and denied by the other. Each material proposition and from the one party and denied by the other to form the subject of a distinct issue. An obligation is cast on the Court to read the plaint/petition and the written statement/counter if any, and indigenous with assistants of the landed counsel for the parties committed propositions of fact or law on which the parties are at variance. Issues should be framed and recorded on with this in the case will depend”

Bcoz u want specific judgement it may take lil time

Bachhaj Nahar vs Nilima Mandal & Ors on 23 September, 2008

A Court cannot make out a case not pleaded. The court should confine its decision to the question raised in pleadings. Nor can it grant a relief which is not claimed and which does not flow from the facts and the cause of action alleged in the plaint.

Ram Sarup Gupta (dead) by LRs., vs. Bishun Narain Inter College [AIR 1987 SC 1242]:

"It is well settled that in the absence of pleading, evidence, if any, produced by the parties cannot be considered. It is also equally settled that no party should be permitted to travel beyond its pleading and that all necessary and material facts should be pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by it. The object and purpose of pleading is to enable the adversary party to know the case it has to meet. In order to have a fair trial it is imperative that the party should state the essential material facts so that other party may not be taken by surprise. The pleadings however should receive a liberal construction, no pedantic approach should be adopted to defeat justice on hair splitting technicalities. Sometimes, pleadings are expressed in words which may not expressly make out a case in accordance with strict interpretation of law, in such a case it is the duty of the court to ascertain the substance if the pleadings to determine the question. It is not desirable to place undue emphasis on form, instead the substance of the pleadings should be considered. Whenever the question about lack of pleading is raised the enquiry should not be so much about the form of pleadings, instead the court must find out whether in substance the parties knew the case and the issues upon which they went to trial. Once it is found that in spite of deficiency in the pleadings, parties knew the case and they proceeded to trial on those issue by producing evidence, in that event it would not be open to a party to raise the question of absence of pleadings in appeal."

in Nedunuri Kameswaramma v. Sampati Subba Rao [AIR 1963 SC 884]:

"No doubt, no issue was framed, and the one, which was framed, could have been more elaborate, but since the parties went to trial fully knowing the rival case and led all the evidence not only in support of their contentions but in refutation of those of the other side, it cannot be said that the absence of an issue was fatal to the case, or that there was that mistrial which vitiates proceedings. We are, therefore, of opinion that the suit could not be dismissed on this narrow ground, and also that there is no need for a remit, as the evidence which has been led in the case is sufficient to reach the right conclusion."

What is the suit you have filed and what is the nature of grievance that you seek a judgment favoring your situation.

The details furnished are not sufficient to search for a relevant judgment

What is the stage of the suit pending before court?

Revert with details for more proper solutions.

he Registrar cannot hold enquiry regarding right and title of the parties over the property. Registration of documents by the Registrar, is not an administrative function, but it is a statutory function. It is further stated that Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act states that registration is only a notice to the public and the same will not confer any title.

Madras high court judgment in a writ petition in M.Baskar vs The Sub Registrar on 10 December, 2014 in Writ Petition No.4023 of 2011

And M.P.Nos. 1 & 2 of 2011 & 1 to 3 of 2014

may be a good reference to your case.

Could not find bombay or SC judgments, but the legal position is clear, the question of law need not be pleaded.

K. Thangappa Pillai (Died) vs Arulmighu Srinivasa Devasthanam on 16 December, 2009

Dear Client,

Issue in law do not required specifically pleaded in the petition but only facts. Pure question of law can be raised at any any stage.

- http://www.tcl-india.net/node/378

Whereas Issue of Limitation is mixed question of Law as reinterpreted by Hon`ble Supreme Court -

Balasaria Construction (P) Ltd. v. Hanuman Seva Trust and Ors. 2006 (5) SCC 658 wherein it had been held that a suit could not be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure in the absence of proper pleadings relating to limitation, particularly when the question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact and on a mere reading of the plaint the suit could not be held to be barred by limitation.

14. A similar view was taken by this Court in Narne Rama Murthy v. Ravula Somasundram and Ors. 2005 (6) SCC 614 where also the question of limitation was an inextricably mixed question of law and fact and the bar of limitation could not be decided without considering the related facts giving rise to such question.

Contact for more detail for precise opinion -

The following judgement of the SC says that parties/ courts can not go beyond the pleadings:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/66411641/

Regards

Let me know if some further help is required, or if there is some inconsistency in the judgment provided

Regards