BIREN VAISHNAV, NISHA M. THAKORE
Heirs Of Decd. Ibrahimbhai Kalubhai- Decd Ibrahimbhai Through Heirs. – Appellant
Versus
Heirs Of Decd. Pirubhai Kalubhai- Abdulkarim Pirmohmmad Shaikh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NISHA M. THAKORE, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the appellants-original plaintiffs under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”), being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 25.07.2013 passed below Exh.26 in Regular Civil Suit No.47 of 2012 by learned Additional Civil Judge, Viramgam.
2. By the said impugned judgment and order, the application preferred by the original defendants vide Exh.26 under Order VII Rule 11 (a) of the Code, is allowed and the suit is ordered to be rejected.
3. In nutshell, the facts as pleaded by the present appellants before the trial court, are summarized as under:
3.1 The original plaintiffs had preferred the aforesaid suit in respect of various parcels of agricultural lands bearing revenue survey nos. 892,893, 894, 903, 904, 910, 911 and 941 (for short, ‘suit properties’) at village : Viramgam, District : Ahmedabad. It was pleaded that the suit properties are ancestral and undivided joint family property of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants. It was pleaded that the aforesaid parcels of lands originally belong to Mr. Kalubhai Pirubhai, who expired on 19.06.1946. He was survived by two sons namely Ibrahimbh
Dahiben vs. Arvinbhai Kalyanji Bhanushali (Gajra) dead through legal representatives and ors.
Hardesh Ores (P) Ltd. Vs. Hede and Co.
Madanuri Sri Rama Chandra Murthy vs. Syed Jalai (2017) 13 SCC 174
Swamy Atmananda vs. Sri Ramakrishna Taporvanam (2005) 10 SCC 51
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a plaintiff must clearly establish a valid cause of action, including details of inheritance and right to sue, to maintain a suit for joint ow....
A plaint must disclose a clear cause of action and right to sue; mere adverse entries in revenue records do not suffice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering documents filed along with the plaint for deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The judgment emphasized....
The court upheld that the limitation period for challenging a sale deed starts upon knowledge of the transaction, confirming the lower courts' rejection of the plaint on limitation grounds.
Plaint not rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where averments disclose cause from challenge to recent mutations/sales based on alleged wrong entries post pre-statute tenancy relinquishment; jurisdi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.