When a plaintiff files a civil suit, the defendant must get a copy of the plaint and all documents that the plaintiff has filed along with it, without which, a defendant cannot set up her defence.
A question that arises in practice is: does the defendant have the right to receive these copies free of charge, at the very outset of the suit, or to obtain them separately by their own way from the case file?
The answer, firmly grounded in statute and affirmed repeatedly by the courts, is that the defendant is entitled to the complete set — the plaint together with all annexed documents — as an integral part of the service of summons, without having to pay anything for it.
This write-up sets out the legal basis for that right, drawing on the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala, as well as the judicial decisions that have interpreted and reinforced them.
What an Original Suit must Include
An Original Suit must include the full set of documents that constitutes the plaintiff’s case as filed before the court. It includes:
- The Plaint: The written pleading setting out the plaintiff’s claim, the facts relied upon, the relief sought, and the valuation of the suit.
- All Documents Filed Along with the Plaint: These are the documents on which the plaintiff relies in support of the claim — title deeds, agreements, receipts, correspondence, or any other documents in the plaintiff’s possession — which are required to be filed under Order VII, Rule 14 of the CPC.
- The List of Documents: A schedule listing the documents filed, which under Order VII, Rule 1(e) must form part of the plaint.
The Statutory Framework: CPC Provisions
1. Order V, Rule 2 — Summons Must Be Accompanied by a Copy of the Plaint
The most fundamental provision is Order V, Rule 2 of the CPC, which deals with service of summons. It provides that every summons issued to a defendant shall be accompanied by a copy of the plaint.
The courts have consistently interpreted this provision to mean not just the plaint in isolation, but the complete set — the plaint together with all documents annexed to it.
The object of serving the defendant is to put them on notice of the entire case they are required to meet. A copy of the plaint without its supporting documents would give the defendant an incomplete picture and would frustrate the very purpose of service.
2. Order VII, Rule 9 — The Plaintiff’s Obligation to Furnish Copies
Order VII, Rule 9 (1) of the CPC lays down an express obligation on the plaintiff — not on the defendant or the court machinery — to furnish copies. It provides that upon the plaint being admitted by the court, the plaintiff shall present, within such time as the court may fix, as many copies of the plaint on plain paper as there are defendants.
The phrase “on plain paper” is significant. These are ordinary photocopies that the plaintiff must arrange and submit at their own cost. There is no provision for the court to charge the defendant for receiving these copies, for the simple reason that the copies are not being provided to the defendant as a service by the court — they are being furnished by the plaintiff as a mandatory procedural step.
3. Order VII, Rule 14 — Documents on Which the Plaintiff Relies
Order VII, Rule 14 requires the plaintiff to file, along with the plaint, all original documents in their possession or power on which the suit is based, irrespective of whether those documents support or are adverse to the plaintiff’s case. Photocopies of all such documents must be filed. These documents, once filed, form the set that must be served on the defendant along with the summons under Order V, Rule 2. They are not an optional addition — they are a required part of the filing.
4. Order IX, Rule 2 — The Consequence of Non-Compliance
Perhaps the clearest indication that the obligation to furnish copies rests entirely on the plaintiff — and not on the defendant or the court — is found in Order IX, Rule 2 of the CPC. This provision states that if, on the day fixed for the hearing, it is found that the summons has not been served on the defendant because of the plaintiff’s failure to pay court fees, postal charges for service, or to present copies of the plaint as required by Order VII, Rule 9, the court may order that the suit be dismissed.
In other words, non-supply of copies to the defendant is the plaintiff’s default, and the plaintiff’s suit suffers the consequences. The defendant is never asked to bear this burden. This provision conclusively establishes that the copies are to be provided free of charge to the defendant — they are part of the process of service for which the plaintiff is responsible.
The Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala
Rule 111 of the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala confers a broad and unqualified right on every party to a suit. It provides that a party shall be at liberty to inspect, and obtain a copy of, any document filed in court. This right is not limited to any particular stage of the proceedings, nor is it confined to any category of documents. It covers all documents filed in the court record, including those filed by the plaintiff along with the plaint.
This is a distinct right from the right flowing from Order V, Rule 2 CPC. Even if, hypothetically, there were a gap in the CPC’s coverage, Rule 111 independently ensures that the defendant can access and obtain copies of all documents on the court record. Courts in Kerala have confirmed that there is no prohibition — either under the CPC or under the Civil Rules of Practice — against a party obtaining copies of documents filed in court.
Rule 112 of the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala goes a step further. It provides that every party and their pleader, desiring to inspect any proceedings filed in court, shall present a memorandum specifying what they wish to inspect. Importantly, such inspection is allowed without the payment of any fee during the pendency of the suit, appeal, or matter.
This provision reflects a conscious legislative choice to remove the financial barrier that might otherwise prevent a defendant from knowing the case against them. The legislature understood that justice requires access, and access must not be contingent on the ability to pay.
Key Judicial Decisions
Nahar Enterprises vs Hyderabad Allwyn Ltd. And Anr. [2007 (9) SCC 466]
The Supreme Court, in paragraph 9 of this ruling, held that when a summons is issued calling upon a defendant to appear and file a written statement, it is obligatory on the part of the court to send a copy of the plaint and other documents appended thereto along with the summons, in terms of Order V, Rule 2 CPC.
The use of the word “obligatory” leaves no room for discretion or qualification. It is a non-negotiable requirement. The defendant does not have to ask for these copies, nor pay for them — they must be provided as a matter of course.
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. M/s National Building Construction India Ltd. (Supreme Court, 2023)
The Supreme Court reaffirmed and strengthened the earlier position in this decision. The court explicitly accepted the legal proposition that service under Order V, Rule 2 CPC means service of the summons together with a copy of the plaint and the set of documents. It reiterated that service of the suit is not complete unless the complete set — comprising the plaint and all annexed documents — has been supplied to the defendant.
The Delhi High Court decisions ITD Cementation India Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (Delhi HC, 2023) and Vikrant Khanna v. Amita Lamba (Delhi HC, 2024), relying on the Supreme Court’s judgments, further crystallised the position.
The Court held that a plaint is required to be accompanied by a full set of documents as filed on behalf of the plaintiff for service upon the defendants, and that service cannot be treated as complete unless the complete paper book has been supplied. These decisions make it explicit that the right is to the full set, not to a selected portion or a mere list.
The Principle from Ramrameshwari Devi v. Nirmala Devi (2011) 8 SCC 249
The Supreme Court in this case, while addressing the importance of pleadings and documents in civil litigation, emphasised that it is necessary for the other party to know the contours of the case it is required to meet. This principle grounds the entire scheme described above in constitutional values. The right to receive copies of the plaint and annexed documents at the outset is not merely a procedural technicality — it is a direct expression of the principle of audi alteram partem (hear the other side), which is a fundamental element of natural justice.
Summary of Legal Basis
The following table summarises all the provisions and judgments that together establish the defendant’s right to receive copies free of charge at the outset:
Provision / Authority |
Effect on Defendant’s Right |
|---|---|
| Order V, Rule 2, CPC | Every summons must be accompanied by a copy of the plaint and all annexed documents (the complete paper book). Defendant receives these free of charge as part of service. |
| Order VII, Rule 9(1), CPC | The plaintiff must furnish, at their own cost, as many copies of the plaint on plain paper as there are defendants. The burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. |
| Order VII, Rule 14, CPC | The plaintiff must file all documents on which the suit is based along with the plaint. These form part of the paper book that must be served. |
| Order IX, Rule 2, CPC | Non-supply of copies is the plaintiff’s default, and the plaintiff’s suit may be dismissed for it. The defendant bears no responsibility or cost. |
| Rule 111, Kerala Civil Rules of Practice | A party may inspect and obtain a copy of any document filed in court. No restriction or payment obligation is imposed on the defendant. |
| Rule 112, Kerala Civil Rules of Practice | Inspection of proceedings during pendency of suit is allowed without payment of any fee. |
| 2007 (9) SCC 466 (Supreme Court) | It is obligatory to send copies of the plaint and annexed documents with every summons. |
| National Insurance Co. Ltd. (SC, 2023) | Service is not complete unless the complete paper book is supplied to the defendant. |
| Vikrant Khanna v. Amita Lamba (DHC, 2024) | A full set of all filed documents must accompany the plaint at the time of service. |
| Ramrameshwari Devi v. Nirmala Devi (2011) 8 SCC 249 | A party is entitled to know the full contours of the case against them — a natural justice guarantee. |
Practical Implications for a Defendant
In practical terms, the legal position described above means the following for a defendant in an original civil suit:
- At the time of service of summons: The defendant is entitled to receive the full set of case file — the plaint plus all documents annexed to it — along with the summons itself. It is a right.
- No payment required: The defendant need not pay for these copies. The cost of furnishing copies falls entirely on the plaintiff as a mandatory procedural obligation.
- A list of documents is not enough: If the plaintiff or the court provides only the plaint or only a list of the annexed documents, and not the documents themselves, service is legally incomplete. The defendant may raise this before the court.
- Additional access rights under Kerala Rules: Even beyond the initial service, the defendant has an ongoing right under Rules 111 and 112 of the Kerala Civil Rules of Practice to inspect and obtain copies of any documents filed in court, free of any inspection fee, during the pendency of the suit.
- Remedy for non-compliance: If the plaintiff fails to supply the required copies, the defendant may bring this to the court’s attention. The court has the power, under Order IX, Rule 2, to dismiss the suit for the plaintiff’s default in this regard.
Conclusion
The right of a defendant to receive copies of the plaint and all documents annexed to it, free of charge and at the very commencement of the suit, is not an implied or peripheral right — it is embedded in the express text of the Code of Civil Procedure and reinforced by the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala. It has been consistently recognised and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court of India in multiple decisions spanning nearly two decades.
This right flows from a simple and compelling principle: a defendant who does not know the full case against them cannot mount a full defence. The law ensures this by placing the burden of supply squarely on the plaintiff, by making service legally incomplete without the complete paper book, and by making the very continuance of the suit dependent on the plaintiff’s compliance with this obligation.
In Kerala, the Civil Rules of Practice add an additional and independent layer of protection through Rules 111 and 112, ensuring that the defendant’s access to court records is never made contingent on payment.
