Back
T.N.SINGH
G. NIRMAN SAHAKARI SANSTHA – Appellant
Versus
VASANTRAO – Respondent
Key Points: - (!) The appeal held that the trial court erred in rejecting the plaint under O. 7, R. 11 (d) without assessing whether the dispute touched only the "business" of the society as per S. 64 (1) (c). (!) - (!) The plaint's prayer for cancellation of a sale deed and removal of construction did not clearly show the dispute touched only the society's business, thus the case could not be dismissed on that ground. (!) - (!) Section 82 bars Civil Court jurisdiction for certain disputes, but the court must determine if the dispute touches the business, management, or liquidation of the society per S. 64 (1). (!) - (!) The High Court directed remand to decide whether O. 7, R. 11 (d) can operate alongside O. 14 Rules 2 and 3, and that if a written statement is filed, a preliminary issue should be decided within two months. (!) - (!) The plaint was to be returned and filed anew in the trial court with a rehearing date, emphasizing proper consideration of issues and pleadings under O. 14. (!)
( 1 ) THIS appeal has been heard expeditiously because an order passed under O. 7, R. 11 (d), C. P. C. by the trial Court is impugned by the plaintiff-appellant. Court below has taken the view that the suit was barred by the provisions of S. 82 read with S. 64 (1) (e) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 for short the Act.
( 2 ) REJECTION of a plaint is indeed contemplated under Cl. (d) of R. 11 of O. 7, C. P. C. , where "the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law". This would mean, according to me, that parties are not at issue in such a case and indeed the question merely is of law and no investigation into any fact is necessary. Indeed, if the "law" by which exclusion of Civil Court's jurisdiction is contemplated, on its face manifests the requirement of investigation into any fact then there would be no scope for passing order under Cl. (d) aforementioned. In such a case, no leap-frog procedure can be adopted by the trial Court to efface or obliterate the right contemplated under O. 14, C. P. C. , under which parties are allowed to raise "issue" and to call for decision of the trial Court on issues so framed. Indeed, the am
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
