Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Shri Anandraj S/o Khemraj Dhariwal and Smt. Santoshidevi wd/o Khemraj Dhariwal, filed a suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, in the Court of 6th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur. They claimed that they were in possession of the suit house property and that the petitioner No.1 had put his lock on the property while his mother, petitioner No.2, continued to reside there. The defendants were relatives. The petitioners alleged that on 15/12/2014, the defendants broke open the lock and forcibly dispossessed them. The suit was filed on 22/06/2015. The respondent filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), contending that the suit was barred by limitation as it was filed beyond six months from the date of dispossession. The trial court allowed the application and rejected the plaint. The petitioners initially filed a revision application, which was converted into a first appeal due to pecuniary jurisdiction changes, and later withdrawn with liberty to file a writ petition. The present writ petition challenged the order dated 23/09/2016. The High Court examined the plaint allegations and found that the date of dispossession was clearly stated as 15/12/2014, and the suit was filed on 22/06/2015, which is beyond the six-month limitation period prescribed under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The court held that the trial court was justified in rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC, as the plaint itself showed that the suit was barred by limitation. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint - Order 7 Rule 11 CPC - Limitation - Suit under Section 6 Specific Relief Act, 1963 - The trial court allowed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC rejecting the plaint on the ground that the suit for restoration of possession was filed beyond the period of six months from the date of alleged dispossession, as per the statements in the plaint. The High Court upheld the rejection, holding that when the plaint itself shows that the suit is barred by limitation, the court can reject it under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC. (Paras 2, 6-10)
B) Specific Relief Act - Suit for Possession - Limitation - Section 6 - The period of limitation for a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is six months from the date of dispossession. The plaint must specifically plead the date of dispossession to satisfy the limitation requirement. In this case, the plaint stated that the petitioners were dispossessed on 15/12/2014, but the suit was filed on 22/06/2015, which is beyond six months. The High Court held that the suit was clearly barred by limitation. (Paras 5-10)
C) Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint - Order 7 Rule 11 - Reading of Plaint - The court must read the plaint as a whole and consider only the averments in the plaint for deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The defence of the defendant cannot be considered. In this case, the trial court correctly read the plaint and found that the suit was barred by limitation. (Paras 6-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the ground that the suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 was barred by limitation, based on the statements made in the plaint itself.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the trial court rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The court held that the suit was clearly barred by limitation as per the plaint allegations.
Law Points
- Limitation for suit under Section 6 Specific Relief Act is six months from date of dispossession
- Order 7 Rule 11 CPC applies when plaint itself shows suit is barred by limitation
- Plaint must be read as a whole for Order 7 Rule 11 application
- Rejection of plaint is proper remedy when limitation is apparent from plaint allegations
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (04) 116
Writ Petition No. 2313 of 2021
Mr. Devendra Chauhan along with Mr. Aditya Chaudhari for petitioners; Mr. Kamal Satuja for respondent Nos.1(i).
Shri Anandraj S/o Khemraj Dhariwal and Smt. Santoshidevi wd/o Khemraj Dhariwal
Shri Nemichand Gulabchand Parekh (Dead) Through His Legal Heirs (Vinod S/o Nemichand Parekh, Smt. Vimaladevi W/o Subhashchand Ranka, Shri Vivek S/o Hukumchand Surana)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging order rejecting plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in a suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to challenge the order dated 23/09/2016 passed by the Court of 6th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur, which allowed the respondent's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and rejected the plaint.
Filing Reason
The petitioners filed a suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, claiming that they were dispossessed on 15/12/2014. The suit was filed on 22/06/2015. The respondent contended that the suit was barred by limitation as it was filed beyond six months from the date of dispossession.
Previous Decisions
The trial court allowed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and rejected the plaint on 23/09/2016. The petitioners filed a revision application which was converted into a first appeal. The appeal was withdrawn on 10/02/2021 with liberty to file a writ petition.
Issues
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the ground that the suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 was barred by limitation, based on the statements made in the plaint itself.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the suit was within limitation as the date of dispossession was not specifically mentioned and the plaint should be read as a whole.
Respondents argued that the plaint clearly stated the date of dispossession as 15/12/2014 and the suit filed on 22/06/2015 was beyond six months, thus barred by limitation.
Ratio Decidendi
When the plaint itself shows that the suit is barred by limitation, the court can reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC. For a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the limitation period is six months from the date of dispossession. If the plaint clearly states the date of dispossession and the suit is filed beyond six months, the plaint is liable to be rejected.
Judgment Excerpts
The present writ petition challenges order dated 23/09/2016, passed by the Court of 6th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur, whereby an application filed by the respondent under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) was allowed and the plaint stood rejected.
As per the case pleaded by the petitioners in the suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the aforesaid Act, the suit house property was occupied by the petitioners... It was stated that on 15/12/2014, the defendants broke open the lock and forcibly dispossessed the petitioners.
The suit was filed on 22/06/2015. The period of limitation for a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is six months from the date of dispossession. Therefore, the suit was clearly barred by limitation.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a suit for restoration of possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in the Court of 6th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur. The respondent filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, which was allowed on 23/09/2016, rejecting the plaint. The petitioners filed a revision application, which was converted into a first appeal due to change in pecuniary jurisdiction. The appeal was transferred to the District Court. On 10/02/2021, the appeal was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to avail appropriate remedy. Thereafter, the petitioners filed the present writ petition on 23/09/2021.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 7 Rule 11
- Specific Relief Act, 1963: Section 6
