- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- O7 R11 CPC | Plaint Can Be Rejected...
O7 R11 CPC | Plaint Can Be Rejected Only When Court Comes To "Definite Conclusion" That Suit Is Not Maintainable/ Barred Under Law: P&H High Court
Drishti Yadav
15 Jun 2022 5:30 AM GMT
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the power to reject plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC should be exercised only when the Court comes to a "definite conclusion" that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law.The bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal added that Order 7 Rule 11 CPC enlists various grounds on which the plaint can be rejected.The observation was...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the power to reject plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC should be exercised only when the Court comes to a "definite conclusion" that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law.
The bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal added that Order 7 Rule 11 CPC enlists various grounds on which the plaint can be rejected.
The observation was made while dealing with a revision petition wherein petitioner's application (original defendant) under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint in a suit for declaration (filed by the Respondent herein) was dismissed by the trial Court, at the threshold.
The petitioner's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint was dismissed by the trial Court observing that the plaint cannot be rejected because the objection taken by the defendant needs to be proved by leading evidence. The petitioner had objected to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that there are certain findings in the rent proceedings.
"Such facts are required to be proved in evidence. Whether such findings would be binding or not is again the matter which is required to be decided after examining the facts of the each and every case," the High Court observed.
Thus, it was of the view that though the petitioner objects to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that there are certain findings in the rent proceedings but the same is required to be proved in evidence.
Observing that the Rent Controller exercises a limited jurisdiction, the court held that the petitioner shall have liberty to pray for framing of a distinct issue on the objection.
Accordingly, the revision petition was disposed of.
Case Title : Yashpal Gulati v. Kulwinder Kaur and Others
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 152
