Order VI Rule 4 CPC - Fraud, Misrepresentation Or Undue Influence Can't Be Proved If Specific Pleadings Are Absent : Supreme Court

"... in terms of Order VI Rule 4 of the Code,in all cases in which the party pleading relies on any misrepresentation, fraud, or undue influence shall state in the pleadings the particulars with dates and items in the pleadings. The extract from the written statement or the plaint does not show that there is any pleading of misrepresentation or fraud", a bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian observed.

The observation was made in a civil appeal in a case where the defendant in the suit was alleging that the sale deed in question was obtained by fraud.

Since the defendant had not pleaded fraud in the written statement, the Supreme Court held that he was not entitled to place evidence in that regard.

"The respondents have not alleged any fraud in their suit or in the written statement in the suit filed by appellant No. 1. The feigned ignorance about the nature of document cannot be said to be an instance of fraud. In the absence of any plea or proof of fraud, respondent No.1 is bound by the written document on which he admitted his signatures and of his wife", the Court said.

Also from the judgment :  Section 92 Evidence Act - Oral Evidence Admissible Only To Show That The Document Is Sham: Supreme Court