Case Note & Summary
The case involves a civil revision application filed by the applicants (defendants in the suit) challenging the order of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pune, which refused to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The suit was filed by the plaintiff, Kumar City Residents Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., against the defendants, including the developer and its directors, seeking declaration, mandatory and prohibitory injunction, conveyance, and damages. The suit pertains to land admeasuring 23,096 sq. mts. (suit land) which was part of a larger project land. The plaintiff alleged that the developer had promised to provide a club house and other amenities but only provided a swimming pool, health club, tennis court, etc., on the suit land, and failed to convey the same to the society. The defendants filed applications under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on the grounds that the plaint did not disclose a cause of action and was barred by limitation. The trial court rejected these applications, leading to the revision. The High Court, after considering the plaint averments and the law, held that the plaint disclosed a cause of action and that the claim for conveyance was a continuing cause of action not barred by limitation. The court emphasized that for the purpose of Order VII Rule 11, only the plaint allegations are to be examined, and the defence cannot be considered. The court also noted that the obligation to convey under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 is a statutory duty that continues until performed. Accordingly, the revision application was dismissed, and the trial court's order was upheld.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint - Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Cause of Action - The court held that for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, only the plaint averments are to be considered and not the defence. The plaint disclosed a cause of action for declaration, mandatory injunction, and conveyance. (Paras 1-10) B) Limitation - Conveyance - Continuing Cause of Action - The claim for conveyance is a continuing cause of action and not barred by limitation. The suit for conveyance of common amenities and club house was held to be within limitation as the obligation to convey continues. (Paras 11-20) C) Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 - Section 11 - Conveyance - The developer's obligation to convey the land and amenities to the society under Section 11 of MOFA is a statutory duty. Failure to convey gives rise to a continuing cause of action. (Paras 21-30)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaint in Special Civil Suit No.556/2019 is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on the grounds of lack of cause of action and being barred by limitation.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the civil revision application and upheld the order of the trial court refusing to reject the plaint.
Law Points
- Order VII Rule 11 CPC
- Cause of Action
- Limitation
- Rejection of Plaint
- Conveyance
- MOFA
