Case Note & Summary
The present Civil Revision Petition was filed by the defendant No.4 in O.S.No.238/2017, a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction instituted by the plaintiffs (respondents No.1 to 3) in the Court of the III Additional Civil Judge, Kalaburagi. The petitioner, after appearance, filed I.A.No.II under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit was barred by law and that the plaintiffs had no cause of action. The Trial Court allowed the application and rejected the plaint. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present revision petition. The High Court examined the plaint averments and found that the plaint disclosed a cause of action, as the plaintiffs claimed to be the owners of the suit property and alleged interference by the defendants. The court held that the power under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC is to be exercised only when the plaint does not disclose a cause of action or is barred by law, and not when the claim is weak or unlikely to succeed. The court set aside the Trial Court's order and directed the Trial Court to proceed with the suit in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code - Order 7 Rule 11(d) - Rejection of Plaint - Cause of Action - The court considered whether the plaint disclosed a cause of action and whether it was barred by any law. Held that the plaint cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d) if it discloses a cause of action, even if the claim may be weak or unlikely to succeed. The Trial Court's order rejecting the plaint was set aside. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure Code - Order 7 Rule 11(d) - Rejection of Plaint - Maintainability - The court examined the scope of Order 7 Rule 11(d) and held that the power to reject a plaint should be exercised only when the plaint does not disclose a cause of action or is barred by law. The court found that the plaint in the present case did disclose a cause of action and was not barred by any law. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, on the ground that the suit was barred by law, specifically that the plaintiffs had no cause of action and the suit was not maintainable.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Civil Revision Petition, set aside the order dated 31-01-2018 passed by the III Additional Civil Judge, Kalaburagi on I.A.No.II in O.S.No.238/2017, and directed the Trial Court to proceed with the suit in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC
- Cause of action
- Plaint rejection
- Declaration and injunction suit
- Property dispute
