HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
SANDEEP JAIN
Rajesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Kumar Sharma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Jain, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 96 CPC against the impugned judgment and decree dated 15.11.2025 passed by the court of Civil Judge(Senior Division)/FTC, Bulandshahr in O.S. No. 863 of 2020 Rajesh Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar and others whereby defendant no.1's application no.125-C2 under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was allowed and consequently, the plaint was rejected.
Plaint case
2. Factual matrix is that the plaintiff/appellant filed O.S.no. 863 of 2020 against defendant of the 1st part Rakesh Kumar Sharma(defendant no.1) and defendants of the 2nd part Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Naresh Kumar Sharma and Urmi Sharma(defendants no.2 to 6) with the averments that the plaintiff and defendants are real brothers and sister, the defendants of the 2nd part are formal parties, against whom no relief has been claimed. It was further averred that the instant suit has been filed seeking declaration of Will dated 17.8.1998 and family settlement dated 25.4.2006.
3. It was further averred that the plaintiff 's mother Late Kamal Rani Sharma wife of Late Ramkrishan Sharma from her personal ornaments, stridhan, etc., purchased disputed
Kuldeep Singh Pathania vs. Bikram Singh Jaryal
Badat & Co. Bombay vs. East India Trading Co.
Karam Kapahi and others vs.M/S Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust & Another
Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. vs. Mahaveer Lunia and others
Sri Biswanath Banik and another vs. Sulanga Bose and others
Salim D.Agboatwala & Others vs. Shamalji Oddhavji Thakkar & Others
The trial court improperly relied on defendant's documents and evidence in dismissing the plaint at the preliminary stage under Order VII Rule 11, highlighting the necessity for evidence before decid....
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it does not disclose a cause of action or is barred by limitation, emphasizing the need for substantive over procedural assessment.
Legal actions must be initiated within prescribed time limits, and stale claims that lack timely assertion cannot proceed; thus, suits filed beyond the limitation period are barred by law.
The limitation for cancellation suits begins from the time the plaintiff becomes aware of the grounds for cancellation, not from the date of the instrument's execution.
Rejection of plaint – Whether suit is barred by any law must be determined from statements in plaint and it is not open to decide the issue on the basis of any other material including written statem....
Gift deed - Rejected the plaint - Limitation - Suit is barred by limitation in view of pleadings of appellant that he came to know about gift deeds only two days prior to filing of suit as such issue....
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC if it is manifestly vexatious, does not disclose a clear right to sue, and is barred by limitation, particularly when the plaintiff does no....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.