Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
Asim Kumar Agarwalla S/o Late Parmeshwar Kr. Agarwalla – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra Kumar Agarwalla S/o Late Banwari Lal Agarwalla – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. These Civil Revision applications arise for setting aside the order dated 16.07.2014 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division) I, Dhanbad in Title (Partition) Suit No. 151 of 2013 whereby the petitions filed by the petitioners under Order VII Rule 11 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE (in short ‘CPC’) for rejection of the plaint has been dismissed.
2. The plaintiff has filed the suit for partition of joint family properties, trade and business of trading companies among the plaintiff, his brothers and sisters those who are alive and their successors who are not alive. The plaintiff claimed to be the co- sharer of the properties, trade, business and trading companies, mentioned in Schedule B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K & L which were said to be either ancestral property or properties purchased from the profits of ancestral property and with the aid of joint family property, by the joint labour of the whole family, and it was asserted that there was a nucleus sufficient to acquire the property and interest thereon by profitable investment thereof for the benefit of the joint family.
3. The plaintiff prayed for the following reliefs: -
“(i) for partition of 1/9th share o
Merely asserting prior oral partition does not negate the right to seek partition; substantial evidence and facts must be examined to determine cause of action, and claims of limitation require trial....
A partition suit can proceed if the plaint discloses a cause of action, and issues of limitation and court fees will be determined at trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suit for partition can be barred by law and limitation if there is already a decree and final decree in place, and the plaintiff fails to en....
The court reinforced that a claim for partition, while a continuing right, can be barred by limitations if not promptly asserted after repudiation of rights by co-owners.
Rule 73 of Rules reads as duties of Registering Officer.
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it fails to disclose a cause of action, and the burden lies on the plaintiff to provide necessary documentation to substantiate claims, especially ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the plea of res judicata requires consideration of the pleadings, issues, and decision in the previous suit, which is beyond the scope of Orde....
The rejection of plaint is valid under mandatory provisions when the plaintiff fails to provide necessary documentation to support their claim for partition.
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
