Point of law: Rejection of plaint - Clever or ingenious drafting cannot mask the Court for consideration of am application seeking rejection of the plaint when the suit is barred by limitation on the face of it.

ORDER :

The petitioner in this revision petition calls in question the order dated 30.08.2018 passed by the LXVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in O.S.No.4224 of 2017 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 (a) & (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’ for short) seeking rejection of the plaint.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:

On 10.06.1967 the family members of the vendors of the petitioner partitioned their properties. Long after the said partition, on 19.09.1994, the petitioner purchased the land to an extent of 1 acre 10 guntas in Sy.No.209/1 of Kodigehalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk under three registered sale deeds and took possession of the aforesaid property in terms of rights under the sale deeds. Pursuant to the petitioner coming into possession of the property, on the strength of the sale deeds, applied for change of revenue entries to the appropriate authority and the mutation entries were changed in the name of the petitioner in terms of mutation Nos.3/94-95, 4/94-95 and 5/94-95.

3. In terms of another sale deed dated 10-12-2003 the petitioner again purchased remaining extent of 1 acre 11 guntas of land in Sy.No.209/1 which totally comprised of 2 acres and 21 guntas. Therefore, the petitioner initially having purchased 1 acre 10 guntas and subsequently the remaining 1 acre and 11 guntas became absolute owner of the entire extent of Sy.No. 209/1.

4. On 18.07.2012, the petitioner applied and was granted conversion of land from agriculture to nonagricultural purposes by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, after which, it is claimed that the petitioner developed the land and was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property right from 1994.

5. The 1st plaintiff claiming to the daughter of one late Ramaiah and plaintiffs 2 to 9 claiming to the wife and children of one late Narayanaswamy who did not have any right or title and even interest over the land filed a suit against the petitioner and 10 others seeking the relief of declaration to declare them as absolute owners and put them in possession of the land to an extent of 1 acre out of 2 acres and 21 guntas and also seek that the three registered sale deeds of the year 1994 are not to be binding on them. The petitioner was arrayed as defendant No.11 in the said suit. In the said suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 (a) & (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking rejection of the plaint. The trial Court rejects the application on the ground that limitation, which plea was set up by the petitioner herein, to be a mixed question of law and fact and declined to accept the application under Order VII Rule 11(a) & (d) CPC. It is the rejection by this order that has brought the petitioner to this Court.

6. Heard Shri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.M. Narayanaswamy and Shri Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 8 are absent.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has grossly erred in not accepting the application filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) & (d) as repeatedly suits are filed by strangers claiming to be family members of the vendors of the petitioner and every time the plaint has been rejected by an order of the trial Court. Such orders having become final, suits are filed again and again which is an abuse of the process of the Court and seeks that the application filed for rejection of the plaint should be allowed and the suit be dismissed with exemplary costs.

8. This Court issued emergent notice on 29.03.2019 and also permitted service of notice on the counsel who represented the plaintiffs before the trial Court, be