Back
2022 Supreme(P&H) 216
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
Yashpal Gulati – Appellant
Versus
Kulwinder Kaur & Ors. – Respondents
CR-667 of 2019(O&M)
Decided On : 01-06-2022
Mr. Vinay Puri, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, Advocate, Mr. Chetan Bansal, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The power to reject a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is to be exercised only when the court comes to a definite conclusion that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law.
Headnote:
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC - Rejection of Plaint - The court's power to reject a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is to be exercised only when the court comes to a definite conclusion that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law. The objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of certain findings in the rent proceedings is required to be proved in evidence. The Rent Controller exercises a limited jurisdiction, and the petitioner is granted liberty to pray for framing of a distinct issue on the objection, which shall be decided by the court along with the suit.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint, which was dismissed by the trial court. The petitioner is a defendant in a suit filed by the plaintiffs for grant of declaration.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the power to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is to be exercised only when the court comes to a definite conclusion that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law. The objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of certain findings in the rent proceedings is required to be proved in evidence. The Rent Controller exercises a limited jurisdiction, and the petitioner is granted liberty to pray for framing of a distinct issue on the objection, which shall be decided by the court along with the suit.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and the maintainability of the suit based on certain findings in the rent proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's power to reject a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is to be exercised only when the court comes to a definite conclusion that the suit is either not maintainable or barred under the law. The objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of certain findings in the rent proceedings is required to be proved in evidence.
Final Decision: The revision petition is disposed of, and all pending miscellaneous applications are also disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral). - The petitioner herein is a defendant in a suit filed by the plaintiffs for grant of declaration. His application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint at the threshold has been dismissed by the trial Court on 23.08.2018. The court has observed that the objection taken by the defendant is required to be proved by leading evidence, therefore the plaint cannot be rejected.
2. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper book.
3. It is well settled that the power to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is required to be exercised only when the Court comes to a definite conclusion that the suit from the reading of the plaint is either not maintainable or barred under the law. Order 7 Rule 11 CPC enlists the various grounds on which the plaint can be rejected. The petitioner objects to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that there are certain findings in the rent proceedings. Such facts are required to be proved in evidence. Whether such findings would be binding or not is again the matter which is required to be decided after examining the facts of the each and every case.
4. The Rent Controller exercises a limited jurisdiction. However, the petitioner shall have liberty to pray for framing of a distinct issue on the objection, so taken, which shall be decided by the court along with the suit.
5. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the revision petition is disposed of.
6. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.
