SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(MP) 534

S.S.JHA, SANJAY YADAV
Vijay Goyal – Appellant
Versus
Madanlal Goyal – Respondent


Advocates:
Aniket Naik for appellant;
VK. Bharadwaj with Anand Bharadwaj for respondents;
R.D. Jain, amicus curiae.

JUDGMENT

Jha, J. -- 1. This appeal is filed against the order rejecting the plaint under Order VII rule 11, CPC by the trial Court.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:

(i) Plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction. In the plaint, plaintiff pleaded that suit properties are the properties of Joint Hindu Family. The properties are situated at Gwalior and Surat in the State of Gujarat. Plaintiff has valued the suit at Rs.4lacs. Plaintiff has sought further relief that he should not be dispossessed from the suit properties as he is a coparcener and is entitled for declaration that he has 1/3rd share in the properties of Joint Hindu Family.

(ii) Defendant filed an application under Order VII rule 11, CPC that suit is undervalued in order to avoid the payment of advolarem Court fee on the valuation of the suit. Plaintiff is seeking partition in the garb of declaration. Suit for declaration without seeking consequential relief of partition is not maintainable. Suit as filed is not maintainable.

(iii) Trial Court rejected the plaint on the ground that suit for declaration alone without seeking further relief for partition is not maintainable. Suit for injunction ag
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top