Back
VIVEK RUSIA
Jagdish S/o Kanhaiyalalji Garg – Appellant
Versus
Siddhi Vinayak Developers – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioners/defendants No.1 & 2 have filed this Civil Revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 being aggrieved by the order dated 06.07.2023 passed by the XXVI District Judge, Indore in Civil Suit No.1380/2022, whereby the application filed under Order XXX Rule 1 of the CPC has been rejected.
2. Draped in brevity, the relevant facts are that respondents No.5 & 6 have filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against petitioners and respondents No.1 to 4 by impleading them as defendants No.1 to 6. The plaintiffs have valued the suit to Rs.12,01,80,880/-. The plaintiffs are seeking decree of declaration that the sale deed dated 21.04.2022 be declared as void and defendants No.3, 4 & 5 be restrained to alienate the suit property.
3. Plaintiff No.1 is a partnership Firm, in which plaintiff No.2 and defendants No.1 & 2 are partners which was incorporated on 20.09.2010.
4. According to the plaintiffs, the plaintiff/Firm purchased the land as mentioned in paragraph – 5 of the plaint. The defendants No.1 & 2 without the consent of the plaintiffs have sold the land by way of registered sale deed which gave cause of action for filing the suit.
5. The
A suit by a partnership firm must be filed by two or more partners, not by one partner alone, as per Order XXX Rule 1 of the CPC.
The court determined the limitation period for a suit regarding cancellation of a sale deed commences at the deed's execution date, emphasizing the need for evidential examination.
Limitation claims on declaration suits necessitate evidence for proper determination, preventing outright dismissal of plaints under procedural grounds.
The court established that limitation must be determined through evidence, and a fresh cause of action arose only from the execution of the sale deed in 2021.
The Court emphasized that on an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, only the contents of the plaint are to be considered, and the alleged violation of statutory law cannot be determined without ....
Point of law: Article 227 deals with power of superintendence by the High Court over all Subordinate Court and Tribunals. The power of superintendence conferred upon the High Court by Article 227 is ....
The exceptions under Section 69(3)(a) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, apply to suits seeking rendition of accounts between partners after the dissolution of a firm.
A suit for specific performance cannot be maintained by partners of a dissolved firm; and claims are barred under Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act and the Limitation Act.
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
