Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
G.S.SANDHAWALIA, JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Himinder Lal – Appellant
Versus
Madan Lal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. public temple trust suit seeks trustee removal, scheme settlement. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. plaint rejection: no trust, sec92 non-compliant, time-barred. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. maintainable suit; fraud alienation; worshippers' rights. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. plaint discloses cause; not vexatious; beneficiaries entitled. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. sale deed challenge barred by limitation, outside sec92. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. fraud knowledge starts limitation (art59); mixed question. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. o7 r11 only rejects vexatious plaints; no partial rejection. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 8. sec92(1)(h) permits alienation relief post-evidence. (Para 42) |
| 9. single judge order upheld; appeal dismissed. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.
Challenge, by way of present appeal has been laid to the order dated 04.01.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in OMP No 238 of 2020 in Civil Suit No.5 of 2020, whereby the application under Order 7 Rules 11 and 11 (d) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as “CPC” for short) filed by defendants No. 23, 24 (a) and 24 (b) has b
Plaint under Section 92 CPC not rejected under Order VII Rule 11 where it discloses cause of action via fraud/breach allegations in public religious trust; limitation/mixed issues triable; no partial....
The court ruled that temple property cannot be alienated by trustees without obtaining necessary permissions and demonstrating community consent as per applicable law.
The Court upheld the rejection of the plaint, establishing that suits challenging registered documents must be filed within the designated limitation period and emphasized that clever drafting cannot....
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 held that a plaint can only be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it does not disclose a cause of action, and the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact.
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
