Gita Mittal, J.

“No litigant has a right to unlimited drought on the court time and public money in order to get his affairs settled in the manner as he wishes. Easy access to justice should not be misused as a licence to file misconceived or frivolous petitions!” [Buddhi Kota Subbarao (Dr.) v. K. Parasaran & Ors., (1996) 5 SCC 530]

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal challenging the order dated 28th November, 2014 passed in CS(OS)No.724/2006. A composite order dismissing I.A.No. 8296/2014 filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC' for brevity) and thereafter holding that the suit filed by the plaintiff was barred by time resulting in rejection of the plaint on the ground of limitation was passed. As a consequence, the interim injunction order subsisting in favour of the plaintiff appellant came to be vacated.

2. Most of the respondents in this appeal are senior citizens. The respondent no.1 is around 90 years of age, completely bed ridden and could come to court only in a wheel chair, assisted by her daughters