Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Rejection of Plaint in Specific Performance Suit — Cause of Action Disclosed. Court holds that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the claim may ultimately fail on merits.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 31
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment pertains to a Notice of Motion filed by defendant No.1 in a suit for specific performance. The defendant sought rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the ground that it disclosed no cause of action. The court examined the plaint and found that it did disclose a cause of action, as the plaintiff had alleged an agreement and sought specific performance. The court held that the plaint cannot be rejected merely because the claim may ultimately fail. The court also noted that the defendant's other prayer regarding lis pendens was not pressed in the form originally sought, but rather as a request to be allowed to deal with the property subject to the court's discretion. The court dismissed the application for rejection of the plaint.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint - Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Cause of Action - The court considered whether the plaint disclosed a cause of action. Held that the plaint, which sought specific performance of an agreement, disclosed a cause of action and could not be rejected at the threshold. The court distinguished between a plaint that discloses no cause of action and one that may ultimately fail on merits. (Paras 1-3)

B) Property Law - Lis Pendens - Section 52 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - The court considered the prayer to direct the plaintiff to execute a Deed of Cancellation of lis pendens. The court noted that the actual relief sought was to allow defendant No.1 to deal with the suit property without being subject to lis pendens. The court did not decide this prayer in the present order. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the plaint discloses no cause of action and should be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, and whether the plaintiff should be directed to execute a Deed of Cancellation of lis pendens.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Notice of Motion is dismissed insofar as it seeks rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The court did not decide the prayer regarding lis pendens in this order.

Law Points

  • Order VII Rule 11 CPC
  • cause of action
  • rejection of plaint
  • lis pendens
  • Section 52 Transfer of Property Act
  • 1882
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019:BHC-OS:10802

Notice of Motion No.1397 of 2018 in Suit No.1648 of 2012

2019-06-19

B. P. Colabawalla

2019:BHC-OS:10802

Mr. Vijendra Kumar Rai for Plaintiffs, Mr. Anush Sequeira I/by Pravin Mehta & Mithi & Co. for defendant No.1/Applicant, Mr. Vasim A. Shaikh for Defendant No.2

Mukundrai Dipchand Sanghavi

Ambaji Developers, a Partnership Firm and (4) Ors

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for specific performance of an agreement

Remedy Sought

Dismissal of the suit under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and direction to plaintiff to execute Deed of Cancellation of lis pendens

Filing Reason

Defendant No.1 contends that the plaint discloses no cause of action

Issues

Whether the plaint discloses no cause of action and should be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Whether the plaintiff should be directed to execute a Deed of Cancellation of lis pendens

Submissions/Arguments

Defendant No.1 argued that the plaint discloses no cause of action and should be rejected Defendant No.1 sought to be allowed to deal with the suit property without being subject to lis pendens

Ratio Decidendi

A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the claim may ultimately fail on merits. The court must only look at the plaint and not consider defenses.

Judgment Excerpts

This Notice of Motion has been filed seeking a dismissal of the suit under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The ground, on which dismissal of the suit is sought, is that it discloses no cause of action. As far as the prayer for rejection of the plaint is concerned, I am unable to agree with the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of defendant No.1 that no cause of action has been disclosed.

Procedural History

The suit was filed in 2012. Defendant No.1 filed Notice of Motion No.1397 of 2018 seeking rejection of the plaint and other reliefs. The court heard the motion and passed the present order on 19 June 2019.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order VII Rule 11
  • Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Section 52
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Rejection of Plaint in Specific Performance Suit — Cause of Action Disclosed. Court holds that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the claim ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions by Sleeper Manufacturers Challenging Railway's Rejection of Tenders for Non-Compliance with Technical Specifications. Court upholds Railway's right to prescribe and enforce technical conditions in tender document...