Sanjib Banerjee, J.

1. Even as civil Courts should be alive to the fact that Section 9 of the Code embraces the world of civil matters except those expressly prohibited by law or excluded by necessary implication, a pedantic approach to assess a suit or the substance thereof cannot be permitted to make a mockery of the provision. Every civil Court should be aware of the judgment reported at AIR 1977 SC 2421 (T. Arivandandam v. T.V. Satyapal) that instructs that a Court should assess a plaint on a meaningful -- not a formal -- reading thereof to ascertain the true substance of the claim. The trial judge in this case has fallen woefully short of the duty that was cast on him by law.

2. Two of the defendants in the fanciful suit complain of the mechanical application of Order VII Rule 11 by the trial Court and the rejection of the petitioners' application under that provision. The petitioners refer to Section 20A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 to say that the jurisdiction of a civil Court to receive a matter covered by such provision has been expressly excluded. Section 20A of the said Act of 1992 provides that no civil Court shall have jurisdiction in r