JUDGMENT

Dama Seshadri Naidu, J. - Heard finally at the admission stage by the parties'' consent.

Facts:

2. The petitioner is the defendant and the respondents are the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs filed Civil Suit No. 9 of 2016, to have the petitioner evicted. In that suit, the petitioner, as the defendant, applied under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC to have the plaint rejected. The petitioner has maintained that the plaint reveals no cause of action, so it should be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11 (a) of the CPC.

3. The trial Court, through its order dated 16th September 2017, dismissed the application. Aggrieved the petitioner filed this Writ Petition.

Respondents'' Objection:

4. Before the petitioner''s counsel advanced his arguments the respondents'' counsel has raised a preliminary objection: the Writ Petition under Article 227 is not maintainable; it ought to have been, if ever, under Section 115 of CPC.

5. The respondents'' counsel has taken me through the statutory provisions and also the practice of this Court. Then, he has contended that the only recourse available for the petitioner is to invoke Section 115 of the CPC.

The Petitioner''s Answer:

6. On the contrary, the petitioner''