( 1 ) 1. Defendant's application to reject the plaint under Or. VII r. 11 (a) of the Code of Civil Procedure, was dismissed by the lower court. Hence this revision petition.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner (defendant), the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and hence the same should have been rejected.

( 3 ) PARTIES are brothers. The suit was "for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's right to make use of his back-yard as shown in the sketch GHIJ, without prejudice to the right of the defendant for passage". Cause of action, is stated as having arisen from june 1987 when the defendant served a caveat petition on the plaintiff, wherein, defendant anticipated filing of a suit by the plaintiff in respect of the subject matter. According to the plaint averments, a portion of the backyard to the house was in the possession of the plaintiff in which he made preparations to have a gobar Gas Plant, on seeing which, the defendant filed a caveat stating that he had a right for movement in the said back-yard portion and that no Gobar Gas plant should be erected. After issuing a suitable reply, the plaintiff filed the