The court affirmed the requirement for suits to disclose genuine causes of action, rejecting cases that are manifestly vexatious or rely on clever drafting to circumvent established legal limitations.

JUDGMENT :

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

(1)The above appeal is filed by the 2^nd defendant in the suit in CS.No.43/2023 as against the order dated 27.09.2023 dismissing the application filed by him in A.No.2143/2023 to reject the plaint in CS.No.43/2023.

(2)Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:

(3)The parties in this appeal are close relatives. The appellant is the husband of 1^st respondent and father of 2^nd respondent. It is not in dispute that the appellant and the 1^st respondent have two more sons and they are Mr.C.Prakash Kumar and Mr.C.Haribabu who are not parties in the suit or in the appeal. The suit property is a land admeasuring an extent of 3856 sq.ft [1 ground and 1456 sq.ft.] with a residential building consisting of stilt plus two floors situated at Plot No.4206, New Door No.8, T Block, 8^th Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai-40.

(4)Originally, the property was purchased by the appellant and the 1^st respondent under two Sale Deeds dated 30.03.1994 and 24.02.1994 respectively, thereby getting 50% of the property for each of them. It is admitted that the whole property was jointly enjoyed by them. The building in the property was demolished and a new construction came after obtaining building plan approval from the Chennai Corporation and other statutory authorities in the year 2012. It is now admitted that the new residential building in the property consists of stilt + 2 floors.

(5)The appellant and the 1^st respondent jointly executed a Settlement Deed which is registered as Doc.No.3948/2014 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Anna Nagar, in favour of their daughter, the 2^nd respondent herein. From the Settlement Deed, it is seen that the appellant and the 1^st respondent executed the same in favour of their daughter, the 2^nd respondent herein on their own volition and free will and out of love and affection. Though the settlors have covenanted that the settlement is irrevocable, they however reserved / retained life estate. Nine years later, the 1^st respondent/wife has filed a suit in CS.No.43/2023 to declare the Settlement Deed dated 11.09.2014 as null and void and for granting a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants therein from in any way creating any encumbrance over the suit property.

(6)In the plaint, it is the case of the 1^st respondent, the wife of the appellant herein that she and the appellant were carrying out a lot of business and the family is holding a lot of properties in and around Chennai and both of them have sufficient independent means and financial independence. Though it is admitted that the relationship between the appellant and the 1^st respondent was very cordial and that she blindly believed all that the appellant would say, it is contended that the appellant defrauded her by getting the document of Settlement registered under the pretext that it was a Power of Attorney Deed authorising the appellant to mobilize funds by applying for Bank loan on the strength of the property as security which is required for completing the new construction in the suit property. Stating that the 1^st respondent/plaintiff agreed to execute a Power of Attorney with an intention to complete the construction of a dream home, it is contended that the document was executed by the plaintiff without knowing the contents and the nature of transaction. It is alleged that the appellant fraudulently usurped the plaintiff's share in the suit property by