Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kalika Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, a co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, filed a Civil Revision Application before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad. The application challenged an order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmednagar in Regular Civil Suit No.157 of 2024, which rejected the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for rejection of the plaint. The respondents, Vitthal Marayan Lakhpati and Mukund Narayan Lakhpati, had filed the suit seeking various reliefs including declaration that the attachment and auction proceedings conducted by the petitioner society in recovery proceedings were illegal and void. The petitioner society contended that the suit was barred by Section 163 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, which prohibits civil courts from taking cognizance of any matter arising out of orders, decisions, or awards passed under the Act. The trial court had rejected the application, holding that the suit was not barred. The High Court examined the plaint averments and the relevant provisions. It held that the challenge to the attachment order and auction proceedings conducted in recovery under the MCS Act was absolutely barred by Section 163. The court applied the predominant relief test, noting that the main relief sought was the setting aside of the attachment and auction, which arose from the same cause of action as the other prayers. Consequently, the entire suit was barred. The High Court allowed the revision application, set aside the trial court's order, and rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Rejection of Plaint - Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC - Bar by Law - Where a suit is expressly barred by any law, the plaint must be rejected. The court must examine the plaint averments and the law to determine if the suit is barred. (Paras 1-3)
B) Co-operative Societies - Jurisdiction of Civil Court - Section 163 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Bar of Suits - No civil court shall take cognizance of any matter arising out of any order, decision, or award passed under the Act. Challenge to attachment and auction proceedings in recovery under the Act is absolutely barred. (Paras 2-4)
C) Civil Procedure - Multiple Prayers - Predominant Relief Test - Where a suit contains multiple prayers, if the predominant relief is barred by law, the entire suit is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC, provided the other prayers arise out of the same cause of action. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a civil suit challenging attachment and auction proceedings in recovery under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is barred by Section 163 of the Act, and whether the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Civil Revision Application, set aside the order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmednagar, and rejected the plaint in Regular Civil Suit No.157 of 2024 under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.
Law Points
- Bar of civil court jurisdiction under Section 163 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960
- Rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC when suit is barred by law
- Predominant relief test for multiple prayers
Case Details
Civil Revision Application No.162 of 2024
Mr. Abhijeet C. Darandale for Applicant; Mr. V. B. Bhagwat, Mr. A. C. Sisodiya, Mr. N. S. Sisodiya for Respondents
Kalika Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit
Vitthal Marayan Lakhpati and Mukund Narayan Lakhpati
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil Revision Application against order rejecting application under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC for rejection of plaint in a suit challenging attachment and auction proceedings under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (defendant No.2) sought rejection of the plaint in Regular Civil Suit No.157 of 2024 on the ground that the suit was barred by Section 163 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Filing Reason
The respondents filed a civil suit challenging the attachment order and auction proceedings conducted by the petitioner society in recovery proceedings under the MCS Act.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmednagar) rejected the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC vide order dated 29.06.2024.
Issues
Whether the civil suit challenging attachment and auction proceedings in recovery under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is barred by Section 163 of the Act?
Whether the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC when the predominant relief is barred by law?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that Section 163 of the MCS Act bars civil court jurisdiction over any matter arising out of orders, decisions, or awards under the Act, and the suit challenging attachment and auction is absolutely barred.
Respondents argued that the suit was maintainable as it challenged illegal proceedings not covered by the bar.
Ratio Decidendi
A civil suit challenging attachment and auction proceedings conducted in recovery under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is barred by Section 163 of the Act, and the plaint must be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. Where a suit contains multiple prayers, if the predominant relief is barred by law, the entire suit is liable to be rejected if the other prayers arise out of the same cause of action.
Judgment Excerpts
While Section 163 of the Maharashtra Co operative Societies Act bars any challenge in Civil Court against any Orders, Decisions, Awards passed in accordance with the Maharashtra Co Operative Societies Act 1960, Challenge to an Attachment Order and Auction Proceeding conducted in recovery proceedings under ‘MCS’ Act in a Civil Suit is absolutely barred.
Where in a suit containing multiplier prayers, ‘due to some prayer seeking predominant relief’ suit is expressly barred by any Law; Order VII Rule 11 of CPC for rejection of plaint can be invoked if balance prayer also expressly arises out of the same cause of action i.e. not on any different/separate cause of action.
Procedural History
The respondents filed Regular Civil Suit No.157 of 2024 before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmednagar. The petitioner (defendant No.2) filed an application under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC for rejection of the plaint. The trial court rejected the application on 29.06.2024. The petitioner then filed the present Civil Revision Application before the Bombay High Court, which was allowed on 17.10.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order VII Rule 11(d)
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act): Section 163
