Plaint not rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC despite 28-year delay in specific performance suit where fraud, collusion, unilateral cancellation averred, making limitation mixed fact-law issue requiring evidence; multiple reliefs and cause of action disclosed.

JUDGMENT :

PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.

1. ADMIT. Heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) takes exception to order dated 20.12.2024 passed by the trial Court rejecting the application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) read with Section 151 of the Code, at Exhibit 10, in Special Civil Suit No.459 of 2023.

3. The applicant is the original defendant no.8 in the suit filed by the non-applicant no.1 and the non-applicant nos.2 to 8 herein are the original defendant nos.1 to 7 in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the sale-deed dated 24.10.2020 to the extent of the suit property is not binding on the plaintiff it being executed by playing fraud on the plaintiff as well as for seeking relief of specific performance of the agreements dated 06.10.1995 and 21.11.1995 and for permanent injunction.

FACTS OF THE CASE

4. The case as pleaded by the original plaintiff in the suit is briefly stated as under:-

(i) The suit pertains to the properties described in paragraph 2 of the plaint which is land admeasuring about 15000 square feet shown in the plaint map identified as Survey No.407/2 and 408/2 (New City Survey No.102, Sheet No.261), Mouza Nagpur alongwith superstructure standing on the plot. It is the plaintiff’s case that the defendant no.1 is a ‘HUF’ shown as Anil Kheta HUF of which the defendant no.2 Anil Kheta is the Manager-Karta consisting himself, his wife Pushpa and two sons Anshul and Aniket.

(ii) The defendant no.8 is shown to be the purchaser of the property admeasuring about 42000 square feet out of entire property admeasuring 87000 square feet, as described in the sale-deed dated 24.10.2020 executed on behalf of Anil Kheta i.e. the defendant no.1 and others by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagpur in the execution proceedings bearing Darkhast No.63 of 2020 by order dated 09.10.2020.

(iii) It has to be noted that a suit bearing Special Civil Suit No.291 of 2017 was filed by the applicant herein (Ramesh Rander) against the non- applicant nos.2 to 8 herein seeking specific performance of agreement dated 01.08.2011 about land admeasuring 42000 square feet. The said suit was compromised in Lok-Adalat on 08.02.2020. For execution of this compromise decree, the applicant herein filed Special Darkhast no.63 of 2020. In this execution case, the non-applicant no.1 herein filed an objection under Order XXI Rules 97 and 98 read with Sections 47 and 151 of the Code. This objection (Exhibit 31) was initially rejected by order dated 11.04.2023, which was challenged vide First Appeal No.304 of 2023, before this Court. This First Appeal was allowed by order dated 23.10.2024 and the objection filed by the non-applicant no.1 herein is revived. As such, the said objection under Order XXI Rules 97 and 98 of the Code is pending as on today.

(iv) It is the plaintiff’s case that the defendant no.8 claims to be the owner of the suit property on the basis of a decree passed on account of