I.A.11750/2016 (O 39 R 1 & 2 by plaintiff) & I.A. 12871/2016 (O 7 R 11 by D-6)

1. The case is taken up on the direction of Division Bench in FAO No. 31/2017.

2. Arguments on the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC was heard at length. During the course of the arguments, the Court was of the opinion that since the facts pleaded are not clear enough to disclose when actually the cause of action arose and since the plaintiff had claimed that their knowledge was from the date of the report of Economic Offences Wing (EOW), while the defendants contend that the plaintiff had the knowledge from the earlier dates when the property in dispute as per the report of EOW was demolished in the year 1997 and, therefore, the suit is barred. The defendants have also raised an issue of limitation in their written statement. While disposing of the application under Order 7 Rule 11, the Courts are required to confine its findings only on the averments in the plaint and the contentions raised in the written statements and the documents filed by the defendants cannot be considered. In view of the limited jurisdiction of the Court under this provision of law, the Court is of the opinion that