2013 Supreme(Raj) 745
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.
Gram Panchayat Mungthala - Appellant
Versus
Bahadur Singh - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9606 of 2010.
Decided On : 4-02-2013
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:H.G. Chanda, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Rajesh Panwar, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the trial court's decision to reject the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC was upheld, and the court emphasized the importance of deciding the application based on the pleadings of the plaint.
Headnote:
Order 7, Rule 11 CPC - Revision Petition - The court treated the writ petition as a revision petition and dismissed it, stating that the trial court did not commit any error in rejecting the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent raised an objection that the writ petition is not maintainable against the impugned order dated 7.4.2010, which rejected an application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC. The court treated the writ petition as a revision petition and dismissed it.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court did not commit any error in rejecting the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC. The court dismissed the revision petition, stating that there was no reason to interfere in the matter.
Issues: The main issue was whether the writ petition was maintainable against the impugned order and whether the trial court committed an error in rejecting the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the trial court did not commit any error in rejecting the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC. The court also emphasized that the grounds raised in the reply cannot be considered at the time of deciding the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, and the trial court is required to decide only on the basis of the pleadings of the plaint.
Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed, and the court held that there was no reason to interfere in the matter.
JUDGMENT
1. - Learned counsel for the respondent has raised an objection that this writ petition is not maintainable against the impugned order dated 7.4.2010 whereby an application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC was rejected.
2. There is strength in the argument of learned counsel for the respondent. Therefore, this writ petition is hereby treated as revision petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has committed a grave error while rejecting the application filed by the Gram Panchayat Mungthala filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC because for instituting the suit against the Panchayati Raj Institution, it is mandatory to first give notice under Section 109 of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, therefore, learned trial Court ought to have considered this aspect of the matter at the time of deciding the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC but while ignoring the provision of law, the trial Court rejected the application, which is totally illegal.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that order was passed on 7.4.2010 and near about two and half years have passed and there is no stay operating in this case, so also, the objection was raised by the petitioner for providing opportunity after framing issue in the trial Court, therefore, at this stage, the order impugned does not require any interference because for the purpose of deciding the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, the plaint is required to be seen and according to the suit filed by the respondent plaintiff, he has not prayed for compliance of any provision enumerated in the Act. It is also worthwhile to observe that at the time of deciding the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, no reply or the grounds raised in the reply can be considered and trial Court is required to decide only on the basis of the pleadings of the plaint.
6. In view of above, I see no reason to interfere in this revision petition. Hence, the revision petition is dismissed.Petition Dismissed.
*******
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
