JUDGMENT :

Rahul Bharti, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and also respondent no. 1.

2. Dormant potentiality of Order VII rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was given a kinetic impetus and interpretation by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in case of T. Arivandandam vs. T.V. Satyapal, 1977 AIR SC 2421 by imploring the civil courts handling the civil suits to apply a diagnostic examination of a plaint at first blush so as to check its fitness for onward march of trial so that in case a plaint, in its true hue, is found to be bearing just a disguise of a cause of action then to deliver it a rejection.

3. The Court of learned 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu reminded itself of said potentially of Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC by not falling to trap of an illusion of cause of action set up in his plaint to order its rejection which has brought the appellant in present civil first appeal under section 96 CPC and this court is also dealing with same skill to deal with the appeal at its very inception so as to show it its resting place.

4. This is a Civil 1st Appeal against a judgment and decree dated 04.02.2023 passed by the trial court of learned 1st Additional