Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, who is the first defendant in a suit for partition and separate possession, filed a revision petition under Section 115 CPC challenging the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani, rejecting I.A.No.9 filed under Order 12 Rule 6 read with Section 151 CPC. The suit, O.S.No.138/2014, was filed by the plaintiff (respondent No.1) seeking partition and separate possession of joint family properties. The petitioner contended that the plaintiff had made clear admissions in the plaint and written statement that the properties were joint family properties and that the plaintiff was in possession of certain items, which entitled the petitioner to a judgment on admissions and dismissal of the suit. The Trial Court rejected the application, holding that the admissions were not clear and unequivocal and that there were disputed questions of fact requiring trial. The High Court, after hearing both sides, upheld the Trial Court's order, observing that the alleged admissions were not clear and unambiguous, and that the suit involved disputed questions of fact which could not be decided in an application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. The revision petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Judgment on Admissions - Order 12 Rule 6 CPC - Clear and Unequivocal Admission - The court reiterated that for invoking Order 12 Rule 6 CPC, the admission must be clear, unambiguous, and unequivocal. In the present case, the alleged admissions in the written statement were disputed and required trial, hence the application was rightly rejected. (Paras 6-10) B) Civil Procedure - Revision - Section 115 CPC - Interference with Discretionary Order - The High Court in revision under Section 115 CPC will not interfere with a discretionary order unless it suffers from jurisdictional error or perversity. The Trial Court's order rejecting IA No.9 was found to be neither illegal nor perverse. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the application filed under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC seeking judgment on admissions and dismissal of the suit.
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani, rejecting I.A.No.9 in O.S.No.138/2014 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Order 12 Rule 6 CPC
- judgment on admissions
- clear and unequivocal admission
- disputed questions of fact
- Section 115 CPC
