Order VIII Rule 4 CPC - Evasive Denial
Order 8 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 requires a defendant to respond to the substance of allegations in a plaint. A vague, indirect or evasive denial does not satisfy the rule.
Statutory Text of Order VIII Rule 4 CPC
Order VIII of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with written statements, set-off and counter-claims. Rule 4 is titled Evasive-denial and provides:
Where a defendant denies an allegation of fact in the plaint, he must not do so evasively, but answer the point of substance. Thus, if it is alleged that he received a certain sum of money, it shall not be sufficient to deny that he received that particular amount, but he must deny that he received that sum or any part thereof, or else set out how much he received. And if an allegation is made with diverse circumstances, it shall not be sufficient to deny it along with those circumstances.
Source: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - official India Code PDF.
Meaning of Evasive Denial Under Order 8 Rule 4
Evasive denial means a response that appears to dispute a factual allegation but avoids addressing its essential substance. The defendant must make clear what is disputed rather than relying on carefully limited or ambiguous wording.
The rule is particularly important when the plaint alleges receipt of money, execution of a transaction, delivery of goods or another event described through several factual circumstances. The written statement should deal with the material allegation itself, not merely an incidental detail.
Essential requirements
- Identify the factual allegation being denied.
- Answer its substantive point directly and clearly.
- Where receipt of money is alleged, deny receipt of the whole or any part, or specify the amount actually received.
- Where several circumstances are alleged, avoid a denial limited to the combined circumstances that leaves the central fact unanswered.
- Read Rule 4 together with the requirements of specific denial under Rules 3 and 5.
Examples of Evasive and Specific Denial
| Allegation in the plaint | Evasive response | Substantive response (illustrative) |
|---|---|---|
| The defendant received Rs. 1,00,000 from the plaintiff. | "The defendant denies receiving Rs. 1,00,000." | "The defendant received no money from the plaintiff" or "The defendant received Rs. 40,000 only, not Rs. 1,00,000," if factually correct. |
| The defendant received goods on 10 June against an invoice. | "The defendant denies receiving goods on 10 June against that invoice." | State whether goods were received at all and, if so, identify the actual date, quantity or transaction disputed. |
| The defendant signed an agreement in the presence of named witnesses. | "The defendant denies signing the agreement in the presence of those witnesses." | State whether the signature or execution is disputed, separately from any dispute about the witnesses. |
These examples explain the pleading principle; the appropriate response always depends on the true facts and available records.
Relationship With Order VIII Rules 3 and 5
Order VIII Rule 3 - Denial to be Specific
Rule 3 requires a defendant to deal specifically with each allegation of fact not admitted, subject to the rule's wording concerning damages. A general denial of the plaint is not sufficient.
Order VIII Rule 4 - No Evasive Denial
Rule 4 adds that even a purportedly specific denial must address the real substance of the allegation. Merely denying a precise amount or a particular combination of circumstances may leave the underlying allegation unanswered.
Order VIII Rule 5 - Specific Denial and Deemed Admission
Under Rule 5(1), allegations of fact not denied specifically, by necessary implication, or stated to be not admitted may be treated as admitted, except as against a person under disability. The court retains discretion to require proof of a fact notwithstanding such admission. The effect of a deficient denial must therefore be assessed in light of the complete pleading and the applicable procedural provisions.
Additional Requirements in Commercial Suits
For commercial disputes of specified value governed by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the amended CPC contains additional pleading requirements under Order VIII Rule 3A.
Among other matters, the defendant must distinguish allegations admitted, denied, or not admitted or denied but required to be proved. When denying a fact, the defendant must give reasons and, if advancing a different version of events, state that version. Disputes concerning jurisdiction or valuation must also be explained as required by Rule 3A.
In applicable commercial suits, Rule 5 also addresses the consequences of failure to deny in the manner required by Rule 3A. These special provisions must be read with Rule 4, rather than treating Rule 4 as the only requirement for a valid denial.
Official reference: Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Schedule and CPC amendments.
Practical Guidance for Drafting a Written Statement
A written statement should address each material paragraph of the plaint and distinguish admitted facts from disputed facts. Where only part of an allegation is true, identify that part accurately. Where the defendant disputes the plaintiff's account, set out the defendant's actual version to the extent required by the applicable rules.
Important: An evasive denial can have serious procedural consequences, including a possible deemed admission under Rule 5. Whether an allegation is admitted, remains disputed, or requires proof is determined from the pleadings as a whole and the governing law. State amendments and court-specific rules may also be relevant.
Official Legal References
- India Code - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Order VIII, Rules 3, 4 and 5).
- India Code - Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Section 16 and Schedule).
Updated: 12 October 2026. This article provides general legal information and does not replace advice on a particular case.