Order VI Rule 15 CPC - Verification of Pleadings
Order VI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 governs how a plaint, written statement or other pleading is verified. It identifies who may verify, requires the verifier to distinguish personal knowledge from information received, and prescribes the signature, date, place and supporting affidavit.
Order VI Rule 15 CPC: Full Statutory Provision
Heading: Verification of pleadings.
(1) Save as otherwise provided by any law for the time being in force, every pleading shall be verified at the foot by the party or by one of the parties pleading or by some other person proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be acquainted with the facts of the case.
(2) The person verifying shall specify, by reference to the numbered paragraphs of the pleading, what he verifies of his own knowledge and what he verifies upon information received and believed to be true.
(3) The verification shall be signed by the person making it and shall state the date on which and the place at which it was signed.
(4) The person verifying the pleading shall also furnish an affidavit in support of his pleadings.
This is the central CPC provision in Order VI (Pleadings Generally). Consult the official India Code legislation portal for the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and applicable amendments. Local High Court rules and special statutes may impose additional requirements.
Meaning and Requirements of Rule 15
1. Who may verify a pleading?
Ordinarily, a party or one of several parties verifies the pleading. Another person may verify it where the court is satisfied that the person is acquainted with the facts. A representative should have adequate knowledge of the case; merely holding a designation or authorisation does not by itself establish personal knowledge of every pleaded fact.
2. Verification must be at the foot of the pleading
The verification appears at the end of the plaint or written statement. Its purpose is to identify the person taking responsibility for the factual assertions and the basis on which those assertions are made.
3. Distinguish personal knowledge from information and belief
The verifier must refer to the numbered paragraphs of the pleading and distinguish facts personally known from those based on information received and believed to be true. A generic declaration that every paragraph is true may fail to reflect this statutory distinction where some matters are not within personal knowledge.
4. Signature, date and place
Under sub-rule (3), the verification must bear the verifier's signature and state where and when it was signed. These particulars are separate from the requirement that the pleading itself be signed under Order VI Rule 14.
5. Supporting affidavit
Sub-rule (4) requires an affidavit supporting the pleading. The affidavit is a distinct filing requirement; its form and attestation should comply with the applicable procedural and court rules. Verification and an affidavit do not automatically establish the truth of disputed allegations at trial.
Illustrative Verification Clause
The following is a simplified example for explanation, not a prescribed court form:
I, [name], the plaintiff in the above suit, verify that the statements in paragraphs 1 to 5 are true to my personal knowledge and that the statements in paragraphs 6 to 8 are based on information received and believed by me to be true.
Verified at [place] on [date].
Signature of the person verifying: __________
The paragraph numbers and the division between personal knowledge and information must reflect the actual pleading. A supporting affidavit must also be furnished, and any court-specific format followed.
Difference Between Order VI Rule 15 and Rule 15A
- Rule 15: General verification requirements for pleadings, subject to any different law in force.
- Rule 15A: Special verification procedure for covered commercial disputes, requiring an affidavit in the prescribed Statement of Truth form.
- Consequences: Rule 15A expressly addresses restrictions on reliance on unverified pleadings and the court's power to strike out a pleading lacking the required Statement of Truth. Those special consequences should not be automatically attributed to ordinary Rule 15 proceedings.
The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the CPC amendments applicable to commercial disputes should be read together when determining the correct verification format.
Related CPC Provisions
- Order VI Rule 14: signing pleadings by the party and pleader, if any, with an exception for duly authorised signatories.
- Order VI Rule 14A: statement of the party's address for service of process.
- Order VI Rule 15A: Statement of Truth in specified commercial disputes.
- Order VI Rule 16: striking out pleadings in specified circumstances.
- Order VI Rule 17: amendment of pleadings subject to statutory conditions.
- Order VI Rule 2: concise statement of material facts, rather than evidence.
Browse the CPC sections, orders and rules index for related provisions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can verify a pleading under Order VI Rule 15 CPC?
A party, one of the parties, or another person shown to the satisfaction of the court to be acquainted with the facts may verify the pleading.
Must verification distinguish personal knowledge from information?
Yes. Sub-rule (2) requires the verifier to identify the numbered paragraphs verified from personal knowledge and those based on information received and believed true.
Is an affidavit required along with verification?
Yes. Sub-rule (4) requires the person verifying the pleading to furnish an affidavit in support of the pleading.
What must the verification clause contain?
It must be signed by the verifier, specify the relevant paragraph numbers and sources of knowledge, and state the date and place of signing.
Does the same verification procedure apply to commercial disputes?
Commercial disputes governed by the special CPC amendments require verification through the Statement of Truth under Order VI Rule 15A, subject to the applicable statutory framework.
Does a defective verification automatically defeat a civil suit?
Not necessarily. The consequences depend on the defect, the governing procedure and the court's directions. A party should correct defects promptly rather than assume they are immaterial.
