Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 | Order XI

Order XI Rule 7 CPC - Setting Aside and Striking Out Interrogatories

Order XI Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 allows a court to set aside interrogatories served unreasonably or vexatiously, or to strike out questions that are excessively lengthy, oppressive, unnecessary or scandalous. The rule provides a seven-day period after service for an application seeking that relief.

Scope: This article explains Rule 7 of the ordinary CPC Order XI. In qualifying commercial disputes, the substituted Order XI introduced by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 applies, and the corresponding provision is Order XI Rule 2(7), not commercial Order XI Rule 7.

Meaning and purpose of Order XI Rule 7 CPC

An interrogatory is a written question delivered by one party to an opposing party with the court's permission for the purpose of obtaining relevant information on matters in dispute. The discovery procedure helps identify admissions and narrow issues, but it must not be used to harass another party or conduct an unnecessarily wide inquiry.

Setting aside means seeking the court's cancellation of interrogatories on the ground that they were put forward unreasonably or vexatiously. Striking out means removing interrogatories that are prolix, oppressive, unnecessary or scandalous. The court considers the wording, relevance and legitimate purpose of the questions in the context of the suit.

Grounds for setting aside or striking out interrogatories

Unreasonable or vexatious interrogatories

Questions may be challenged when their scope or purpose imposes an unjustified burden or amounts to harassment rather than a genuine attempt to clarify issues in the suit.

Prolix interrogatories

Prolix means unnecessarily lengthy or wordy. Excessive repetition and needless detail may justify striking out the offending questions.

Oppressive interrogatories

Questions may be oppressive if their demands are disproportionate, unduly burdensome or designed to pressure the answering party rather than obtain material information.

Unnecessary or scandalous interrogatories

Unnecessary questions add nothing material to resolving the dispute. Scandalous questions contain improper or offensive allegations or inquiries without sufficient connection to the issues in the suit.

Time limit: application within seven days

Rule 7 states that an application to set aside or strike out interrogatories may be made within seven days after service of the interrogatories. A party wishing to challenge questions should act promptly, identify the specific interrogatories objected to, and explain the relevant statutory ground. The precise procedural consequences of delay depend on the applicable rules and orders of the court.

How Rule 7 operates with other discovery rules

Order XI Rule 1 governs delivery of interrogatories with leave of court. Rule 2 requires proposed questions to be submitted for the court's consideration. Rule 6 permits certain objections, including irrelevance, privilege and lack of bona fides, to be taken in the affidavit in answer. Rule 8 provides for an affidavit in answer within ten days or such other time as the court allows. Rule 7 provides a separate route to challenge the interrogatories themselves.

Position in commercial suits

Section 16 and the Schedule to the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 substitute a special Order XI for applicable commercial disputes of specified value. Its Rule 2(7) contains the corresponding power to set aside unreasonable or vexatious interrogatories or strike out prolix, oppressive, unnecessary or scandalous questions, with the same seven-day application wording.

In that substituted commercial Order XI, Rule 7 concerns the non-application of specified ordinary CPC provisions; it is not the rule about striking out interrogatories. This distinction matters when citing the correct provision before a Commercial Court or Commercial Division.

Practical illustration

Suppose a defendant is served with a long series of questions about unrelated private transactions. If those questions do not reasonably assist resolution of the pleaded dispute and impose an excessive burden, the defendant may seek an order under the applicable Rule 7 or commercial Rule 2(7), identifying the objectionable questions and supporting reasons. Whether relief is granted remains a matter for the court.

Official statutory sources

Read the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (India Code PDF) and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (India Code PDF) for the legislative text. Check applicable state amendments and court rules where relevant.

This article provides general legal information and is not a substitute for advice on a particular case.