Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
MANEESH SHARMA
Rajnarayan S/o Shri Vijaynarayan – Appellant
Versus
Kamla Devi W/o Late Jagdish – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, assailing the impugned order dated 03.01.2026 passed by Additional Civil Judge No. 18, Jaipur Metropolitan-I (Headquarter Sanganer) in Civil Suit No. 512/2025 titled as Kamla Devi and Ors. vs. Rajnarayan and Ors. whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'), has been rejected.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present civil revision petition are that the respondent No. 1 filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction, pleading that Sh. Dulichand (father-in-law of respondent No. 1 and paternal grandfather of respondent Nos. 2 to 4) obtained a Patta dated 09.05.1965 from the Gram Panchayat, Goner, for land situated at 52, Dukaano Ke Peeche, Dus Ki Dhaani, Village Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, measuring 44 x 39 feet (totaling 191 square yards).
3. It was stated in the plaint that after the death of Sh. Dhulichand, the rightful owners of the disputed plot of land, were the sons, i.e., Jagdish and Prahlad, who, being first-class heirs, were ve
A plaint cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 if it discloses a valid cause of action, irrespective of claims of vexatiousness or absence of declaratory relief.
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Nikhil Sharma For the Respondent : Ashish Saraswat
The judgment establishes the principle that the scope of revisional powers of the High Court under Section 115 of the CPC is limited to the irregular exercise or non-exercise of jurisdiction, and doe....
Issues of limitation and sale deed validity require full trial; defenses are not assessed at the preliminary dismissal stage under CPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that at the stage of considering an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, the trial Court need not conduct a roving inquiry into the fact....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, the relevant facts to be looked into are the averments in the plaint, and the pleas ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
