Plaintiff Has No Vested Right To File Replication Under Code Of Civil Procedure: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that there is no vested right accrued to Plaintiff under Code of Civil Procedure to file replication and it is only judicially sanctified.

The Court was considering a Petition against an order of the Trial Court whereby the Application of Petitioner to file replication was dismissed mainly on the ground that testimony of Witness had already commenced by then.

The singled judge bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia observed, "....I am unable to agree with the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that a plaintiff has a right to file replication. It is trite that the Civil Procedure Code does not contemplate filing of the replication, though it is judicially sanctified that once the replication is taken on record, it forms part of pleadings. There is no right vested in the plaintiff to file replication."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Yashaswi SK Chocksey while the Respondent appeared In-Person.

Counsel for the Petitioner had contended that the impugned order was not sustainable because the Trial Court, having permitted filing of the replication ought not to have closed the right. It was further submitted that on the day of passing of the impugned order, he was connected through videoconferencing but due to connectivity issues, he could not be heard and later he sent his associate to the Trial Court. 

The Court noted that despite last opportunity none appeared on behalf of Petitioner to address arguments on pending two Applications, one of which was for recall of a previous order, closing right to lead evidence and the other Application was for permission to place on record the replication.

 It clarified that there is no vested right accrued to Plaintiff under Code of Criminal Procedure to file replication and it is only judicially sanctified.

"There is no error in the view taken by the learned trial court that the clock cannot be set back and once the trial has commenced, there is no scope of accepting replication, which in any case ought to have been filed prior to framing of issues", the Court observed.

The Petition was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Dinesh Kumar Verma vs. Ramesh Ghai (2025:DHC:7976)

Click here to read/ download Order